ftbe  Pennsylvania  Hcabemy 
of  tbe  jflne  Hrts 


Hrt  (Salleries  of  Hmerica 
Series 


t w 

S3 


Each,  one  volume,  octavo,  profusely  il- 
lustrated with  full  page  plates  in  duo- 
gravure. 

Per  volume,  cloth  decorative,  boxed. 

$3.00 

Per  volume,  three-quarters  levant  mo- 
rocco, boxed.  $7.00 

Gbe  Brt  of  tbe  /Ibetropolitan 
Museum  of  IRew  10ork 

BY  DAVID  C.  PREYER 

ttbe  Boston  Museum  of  tffneBrts 

BY  JULIA  DE  W.  ADDISON 

Gbe  Pennsylvania  BcaOemy  of 
tbe  jfine  Bets 

BY  HELEN  W.  HENDERSON 


1 

S3 

S3 

S3 

S3 

1 

S3 

S3 

S3 


L.  C.  PAGE  & COMPANY 
53  Beacon  Street,  Boston,  Mass. 


S3 


PORTRAIT  OF  GEORGE  WASHINGTON  ( see  page  81). 
(The  Lansdovrnc  Portrait .) 

By  Gilbert  Stuart. 


fje  Pennsylvania 
gleatremy  of 
tyt  Mint  ®ets 

3no  ot^er  Collections  of  p^tlaDelptya 

Including  the  Pennsylvania  Museum,  the 
Wilstach  Collection,  and  the  collections  of 
Independence  Hall  and  the  Historical  Society 
of  Pennsylvania. 


By 

Helen  W,  Henderson 


Illustrated 


Boston 

L.  C.  Page  & Company 
mdc  cccxi 


Copyright,  jgu 

By  L.  C.  Page  & Company 
(incorporated) 

All  rights  reserved 


First  Impression,  November,  1911 


Electrotyped  and  Printed  by 
THE  COLONIAL  PRESS 
C.  H.  Simonds  6*  Co.,  Boston,  U.  S.  A. 


THE  GETTY  CENTER 

LIBRARY 


TO 

Gbomas  IP.  Bnsbut3 

PAINTER 

THIS  BOOK  IS  LOVINGLY  INSCRIBED  AND 


DEDICATED 


Introduction 


The  scope  of  the  present  volume  is  limited  to  the 
more  important  of  the  public  collections  of  Phila- 
delphia, with  particular  stress  upon  the  historic 
portraits,  in  which  they  are  extremely  rich.  It 
aims  to  give  some  idea  of  the  artistic  material  in  the 
city,  produced  by  that  galaxy  of  resident  artists, 
whose  presence,  fostered  by  the  court  of  Washing- 
ton, caused  Philadelphia,  in  her  early  days,  to  be 
looked  upon  as  the  Athens  of  America. 

In  Colonial  and  Revolutionary  times,  and  during 
the  early  history  of  the  Republic,  Philadelphia 
was  the  metropolis  of  the  New  World,  the  centre 
of  its  cultivation  and  learning.  The  city  claims, 
also,  the  distinction  of  having  been  the  birthplace 
of  art  in  this  country,  for  here  was  born,  on  Janu- 
ary 22,  1720,  James  Claypoole,  the  first  native 
American  painter  of  whom  we  know,  and  in  1756, 
William  Rush,  the  first  native  born  American  sculp- 
tor. Still  earlier,  in  1711,  Gustavus  Hesselius  had 
come  to  Philadelphia,  from  Sweden,  and  to  him  was 
given  the  first  public  art  commission  in  this  coun- 
try. This  was  the  painting  of  an  altarpiece  for  St. 


VI 


IFntrofcuction 


Barnabas’  Church,  in  Queen  Anne’s  Parish,  in  the 
Province  of  Maryland. 

Of  these  pioneers,  Claypoolei  left  nothing  tangi- 
ble from  which  to  estimate  his  prowess,  but  we 
know  him  to  have  been  the  instructor  of  his  nephew, 
Matthew  Pratt,  whose  work  shows  that  he  was 
guided,  in  the  beginning,  by  a master  of  no  small 
parts.  The  church,  together  with  Hesselius’  master- 
piece, has  disappeared,  though  two  portraits,  at 
least,  by  the  Swedish  settler  have  been  handed  down 
to  us,  while  of  Rush’s  art  the  city  of  his  birth  pre- 
serves numerous  examples,  including  his  master- 
piece, the  full  length  statue  of  Washington. 

The  two  earliest  exhibitions  of  pictures  in  this 
country  were  both  held  in  Philadelphia,  in  the  old 
State  House.  The  first  was  a collection  of  paint- 
ings by  Robert  Edge  Pine,  an  English  radical  and 
follower  of  John  Wilkes,  who  came  to  this  country 
in  the  spring  of  1784  to  paint  a series  of  historical 
pictures  commemorative  of  events  in  the  Revolu- 
tionary War,  but  who  died  before  accomplishing 
his  purpose.  He  brought  with  him  a number  of 
paintings  and  opened  an  exhibition  of  them  in  the 
State  House,  where  he  had  a studio. 

The  second  was  a general  exhibition  of  paintings, 
held  in  the  Senate  Chamber  of  Independence  Hall, 
under  the  auspices  of  the  Columbianum,  or  Ameri- 
can Academy  of  Painting,  Sculpture,  Architecture, 


Ifntro&uction 


Vll 


etc.,  established  at  Philadelphia  in  1795.  The  first 
exhibition  of  the  new  organization  opened  May  22, 
1795,  and  included  one  hundred  and  thirty-four 
works  from  nineteen  exhibitors. 

Philadelphia  was  the  first  American  city  to  found 
an  academy  devoted  to  the  fine  arts,  a movement 
which  antedated  the  formation  of  the  National  Gal- 
lery, of  London,  by  nineteen  years. 

In  December,  1887,  there  was  opened  in  this 
Academy  a loan  collection  of  over  five  hundred 
historical  portraits,  which  was  the  first  systematic 
exhibition  of  the  kind  ever  held  in  America,  and 
was  the  pattern  for  those  held  afterward  in  New 
York,  Boston,  Chicago  and  elsewhere. 

Aside  from  the  old  portraits  in  the  possession  of 
individuals,  there  are  few  institutions  in  the  city  not 
owning  one  or  more  interesting  portraits.  Among 
these  institutions  may  be  mentioned  the  American 
Philosophical  Society,  the  Library  Company  of 
Philadelphia,  the  State  House,  Carpenter’s  Hall, 
the  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania,  the  Mercan- 
tile Library,  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  the 
Musical  Fund  Society,  the  College  of  Physicians, 
the  Pennsylvania  Hospital,  the  United  States  Mint 
and  many  banks  and  insurance  companies. 

In  the  preparation  of  the  material  for  this  work, 
the  writer  acknowledges  the  very  generous  coopera- 
tion of  the  managements  of  the  various  institutions 


viii 


fntrotmction 


included  in  this  partial  review  of  the  art  collections 
of  Philadelphia,  who  have  done  everything  in  their 
power  to  lessen  the  labour  which  such  a compilation 
entails.  Mr.  John  Frederick  Lewis,  president,  and 
Mr.  John  E.  D.  Trask,  manager,  of  The  Pennsyl- 
vania Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts,  and  Dr.  Edwin 
AtLee  Barber,  director  of  the  Pennsylvania  Mu- 
seum, have  been  particularly  kind  in  giving  access  to 
all  available  material,  such  as,  in  the  case  of  the 
Academy,  old  records,  reports,  catalogues,  etc.,  pre- 
served in  the  archives  of  the  institution;  while  in 
dealing  with  the  Pennsylvania  Museum,  the  writer 
has  depended  largely  upon  the  Bulletin  edited  by  the 
Director  for  the  facts  and  often  the  descriptions  of 
the  principal  exhibits. 

At  the  Historical  Society,  where  less  definite  data 
was  available  regarding  the  artistic  aspect  of  its 
truly  splendid  collection  of  old  portraits,  special 
thanks  are  due  to  the  uniform  courtesy,  kindness 
and  helpfulness  of  the  Librarian,  Dr.  John  Woolf 
Jordan,  and  his  assistant,  Mr.  Ernest  Spofford, 
and  the  whole  capable  staff. 

The  writer  begs  to  acknowledge,  also,  a very 
great  debt  to  Mr.  Charles  Henry  Hart,  one  of  the 
leading  experts  on  Americana  in  Philadelphia,  who 
has  aided  and  directed  her  researches  in  the  musty 
records  of  the  past,  and  — in  the  preparation  of  the 
Stuart  chapters,  especially  — to  his  invaluable  series 


Introduction 


IX 


of  articles  on  that  painter  and  his  works,  which 
have  appeared  in  Harper's  and  the  Century  Maga- 
zines, at  intervals,  since  1896. 

Biographical  notes  have  been  gleaned  from  all 
sources*  as  seemed  most  entertaining  and  reliable. 
An  article  by  Mr.  Earl  Shinn,  published  in  Lippin- 
cott’s  Magazine  for  February,  1872,  has  furnished 
a fund  of  data  concerning  the  early  days  of  “ The 
First  American  Art  Academy.” 

Many  of  the  cuts  used  are  from  photographs 
copyrighted  by  The  Pennsylvania  Aoademy  of  the 
Fine  Arts,  and  reproduced  by  their  permission. 

Helen  W.  Henderson. 

Philadelphia,  August  30,  1911. 


' 

’ 

. 


Contents 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

Introduction v 

I.  Historical  Sketch  of  the  Academy  . . i 

II.  Early  Exhibition 29 

III.  Benjamin  West  and  Washington  Allston  . 36 

IV.  Matthew  Pratt  and  the  Peales  59 

V.  Gilbert  Stuart  (1755-1827)  ....  71 

VI.  A Group  of  Early  Portrait  Painters  . . 105 

VII.  The  Portrait  Gallery  Completed  . . . 122 

VIII.  The  Temple  and  Other  Collections  . . 130 

IX.  The  Old  Masters 148 

X.  Contemporary  Foreign  Paintings  . . . 164 

XI.  The  Gibson  Collection 172 

XII.  Sculpture 188 

XIII.  The  Phillips  Collection 212 

XIV.  The  Pennsylvania  Museum  : A General 

Survey 218 

XV.  American  Pottery  and  Porcelain  . . . 226 

XVI.  American  and  Foreign  Glassware  . . . 242 

XVII.  Mexican  Majolica 250 

XVIII.  Chinese  Porcelain  and  Cloisonne  . . . 263 

XIX.  Classic  Pottery,  Swiss  Glass,  Laces,  Fur- 
niture   272 

XX.  General  Collections 282 

XXI.  The  Wilstach  Collection  ....  294 

XXII.  Independence  Hall 313 

XXIII.  The  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania  . 337 

Bibliography . 367 

Index 371 


%ist  of  HUustrations 


PAGE 

Portrait  of  George  Washington  (The  Lansdowne 

Portrait)  (see  page  81)  . . . . Frontispiece 


By  Gilbert  Stuart 

View  of  Central  Square,  on  the  4th  of  July  . . 34 

By  John  Lewis  Krimmell 

Christ  Rejected 46 

By  Benjamin  West 

Dead  Man  Revived  by  Touching  the  Relics  of  Elisha  58 

By  Washington  Allston 

Portraits  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Benjamin  West  . . 64 

By  Matthew  Pratt 

The  Artist  in  his  Museum 66 

By  Charles  Willson  Peale 

Portrait  of  Colonel  John  Nixon.  — Portrait  of  Dr. 

John  Fothergill 97 

By  Gilbert  Stuart 


Portrait  of  Mrs.  Samuel  Blodgett.  — Portrait  of 

Miss  Elizabeth  Beale  Bordley  . . . .99 

By  Gilbert  Stuart 

Portrait  of  Mrs.  Samuel  Gatliff  and  her  Daughter  ioo 

By  Gilbert  Stuart 

George  Frederick  Cooke  as  Richard  III  107 

By  Thomas  Sully 

Portrait  of  James  Ross.  — Portrait  of  Henry  Pratt  iio 
By  Thomas  Sully  By  Henry  Inman 

Pat  Lyon  at  the  Forge  112 

By  John  Neagle 

Portrait  of  Clayton  Earl 116 

By  John  Neagle 

The  Murder  of  Rutland,  by  Clifford  . . . .124 

By  Charles  Robert  Leslie 

xiii 


xiv  oust  of  Illustrations 

PAGE 

The  Right  Honourable  William  Ewart  Gladstone 


at  Downing  Street 127 

By  John  McLure  Hamilton 

Portrait  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  John  W.  Field  . . .129 

By  John  Singer  Sargent 

The  Lady  with  the  White  Shawl  ....  130 

By  William  Merritt  Chase 

The  Fox  Hunt 132 

By  Winslow  Homer 

Mother  and  Child 135 

By  George  de  Forrest  Brush 

The  ’Cello  Player 136 

By  Thomas  Eakins 

Becky  Sharp 138 

By  Thomas  P.  Anshuts 

November 140 

By  Robert  Vonnoh 

The  Skaters 142 

By  Gari  Melchers 

The  Violinist 150 

By  Bartholomew  van  der  Heist 

Ganymede  154 

By  Guido  Reni 

Virgin  and  Child 157 

By  Benozzo  Gozzoli 

Orestes  Pursued  by  the  Furies 164 

By  William  Adolphe  Bouguereau 

A Breton  Peasant  Boy 168 

By  Dagnan-Bouveret 


The  Duke  of  Este  Meditating  the  Death  of  his 


Wife,  Parisina . 170 

By  Andre  Gastaldi 

The  Return  of  the  Flock 173 


By  Jean  Francois  Millet 

The  Great  Oak  of  Ornans 177 


By  Gustave  Courbet 

Seeking  Shelter 179 

By  Emile  Van  Marcke 

In  the  Country 182 

By  Alfred  Sterens 


Ifst  of  Illustrations 

Bust  of  John  Paul  Jones 

By  Jean  Antoine  Houdon 

Bust  of  William  Rush.  — Bust  of  Edward  H.  Coates 
By  William  Rush  By  Charles  Grady 

Man  Cub 

By  Alexander  Stirling  C alder 

The  Battle  of  the  Centaurs  and  Lapithia 

By  John  Graham  Lough 

The  Pennsylvania  Museum,  Memorial  Hall,  Fair- 
mount  Park  . 

Slip  - decorated  Dish  : Pennsylvania  German,  1769.  — 

Sgraffito  Dish:  Montgomery  County,  Pa.,  1805  . 

Mexican  Majolica  Vase,  Decorated  in  Blue  Camaieu. 
Puebla,  about  1660.  — Mexican  Vase,  Polychrome 
Decoration.  Puebla,  about  1780  . . . . 

Mexican  Majolica  Lavabo;  about  1650.  — Old  Mex- 
ican Bandeja 

Sgraffito  Dish  : Dutch,  1718.  — Slip  - decorated  Dish 
by  Thomas  Toft,  Staffordshire  . . . . 

Peach  - Bloom  Vase.  K’ang-hsi  Period.  — Hexagonal 
Vase  ( famille  verte).  K’ang-hsi  Period 

Temple  Censer,  Decorated  in  Enamel  Colours. 
Yung-Cheng  Period. — Large  Quadrangular  Vase. 
Cloisonne  Enamel.  Ming  Dynasty 

Attic  Stamnos,  520-500  b.  c.  Red  Figured  Style. 
Herakles  Struggling  with  the  Nemean  Lion.  — 
Askos  from  Canosa,  3rd  Century,  b.  c.  . 

Swiss  Heraldic  Glass,  1603.  — Swiss  Domestic  Glass, 

1584 

Lace  Cover  Illustrating  Punto  a Maglia  or  Darned 
Netting 

Carved  Glass  Vase,  Emile  Galle.  — Capo  di  Monte 
Seau,  or  Ice  Pail,  1760-1800 

Saracenic  Tin  - enamelled  and  Lustre  Tile  from 
Northwestern  Persia,  13th  Century.  — Large 
Persian  Plaque,  17th  Century  .... 

Group  of  Genuine  Lowestoft.  — Italian  Harpsichord, 
16th  Century 

The  Yellow  Buskin 

By  James  A.  McNeill  Whistler 


XV 

PAGE 

190 

206 

208 

210 

218 

231 

258 

260 

262 

267 

271 

273 

278 

280 

288 

291 

293 

296 


XVI 


tJList  ot  lllustcattons 


Old  Brighton  Pier 

By  John  Constable 

The  Pond:  Hampstead  Heath 
By  John  Constable 

Repose 

By  Jean  Franpois  Raffaelli 
“ Le  Grand  Miroir  ” . 

By  Alexander  Harrison 


Portrait  of  Dr.  Benjamin  Rush 

By  J.  Sharpies 

Portrait  of  James  Hamilton  . 
By  Benjamin  West 


Portrait  of  William  Allen 

By  Benjamin  West 

Portrait  of  William  Hamilton  and  his  Niece, 
Hamilton  Lyle  .... 

By  Benjamin  West 


Ann 


Portraits  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Joseph  Hopkinson 

By  Gilbert  Stuart 

Portraits  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Francis  Hopkinson 

By  Robert  Edge  Pine  and  Charles  Willson  Peale 

Portrait  of  Governor  Thomas  Mifflin  and  his 
Sarah  Morris 

By  John  Singleton  Copley 
Portrait  of  Benjamin  Franklin 


Wife, 


By  Charles  Willson  Peale 

Portrait  of  Mrs.  Benedict  Arnold  (Peggy  Shippen) 

and  her  Son 

By  Daniel  Gardner 


PAGE 

298 

300 

305 

312 

318 

327 

329 

345 

347 

349 

352 

357 

360 


Cfje  ^etmsplbatiia  &catiemp 
of  tfjc  jfme  arts 


CHAPTER  I 

HISTORICAL  SKETCH  OF  THE  ACADEMY 

The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts, 
founded  in  1805,  chartered  in  1806,  is  the  oldest 
institution  dedicated  to  the  fine*  arts  in  the  United 
States,  and  as  such  is  of  unique  importance. 

It  is  the  direct  descendant  of  the  Columbianum, 
which  was  in  turn  the  successor  of  a drawing  school 
started,  in  1791,  by  Charles  Willson  Peale,  a namei 
all  artists  should  revere  and  honour  for  what  its 
owner  was,  and  for  what  he  did  for  art  in  his  time. 

The  Pennsylvania  Academy  owes  its  actual  con- 
ception to  Peale,  who,  some  fifteen  years  before  the 
charter  was  granted,  had  attempted  to  form  a col- 
lection of  paintings  and  sculpture  and  to  found  a 
school  of  art.  His  associates  in  this  effort  were  Will- 
iam Rush,  the  gifted  wood-carver  of  a century  ago, 

1 


2 Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  jf  me  Brts 


and  Giuseppe  Ceracchi,  the  revolutionary  sculptor 
from  Rome,  who  was  in  this  country  at  the  time  for 
the  purpose  of  making  busts  of  Washington,  Hamil- 
ton and  other  prominent  Americans,  and  who  was 
guillotined  on  his  return  to  France  on  the  suspicion 
of  plotting  against  the  life  of  Napoleon. 

The  widely  differing  and  positive  natures  of  these 
talented  gentlemen  did  not  produce  concord  and 
they  disbanded  before  their  purpose  was  accom- 
plished. Peale,  'himself,  was  a man  of  extraor- 
dinary resources  and  of  indefatigable  genius.  Be- 
sides being  a painter  of  undoubted  merit,  and  at  one 
time  the  only  portrait  painter  in  the  colonies,  he 
had  served  as  captain  of  the  volunteers  in  the  Battle 
of  Trenton  and  was  a member  of  the  Legislature  in 
1779.  He  had  a long  list  of  trades  amongst  which 
might  be  mentioned  that  of  saddler,  clockmaker, 
silversmith,  glass-moulder,  taxidermist,  dentist, 
modeller  and  engraver. 

He  established  in  the  Philosophical  Hall  of  the 
old  State  House  a museum  of  rarities,  known  as 
Peak’s  Museum,  and  historians  tell  us  that  Peale 
himself  was  not  the  least  quaint  of  the  exhibits.  He 
seems  to  have  had  to  a degree  the  spirit  of  Bohe- 
mianism,  and  tales  are  told  of  a supper  party  of 
thirteen  given  by  the  brave  old  artist  within  the  ribs 
of  a mammoth  skeleton  in  the  museum.  His  orig- 
inal and  somewhat  naive  tastes  are  amusingly  in- 


Historical  Sfeetcb  of  tbe  Bcabemg  3 


stanced  in  thei  names  of  his  eleven , children,  whom 
he  called  successively:  Raphaelle,  Angelica  Kauff- 
man, Titian,  Rembrandt,  Van  Dyck,  Rubens, 
Sophonisba,  Linnaeus,  Franklin,  Sibylla  and  Eliza- 
beth. 

Peale  possessed  an  enthusiasm  which  failure  could 
not  dampen.  His  early  attempt  to  form  an  academy 
was  not  a success,  and  in  1794,  he  projected  what  he 
called  the  Columbianum.  A plaster  cast  of  the 
Venus  de  Medici,  brought  to  the  Quaker  city  by 
Robert  Edge  Pine,  the  artist,  in  1784,  formed  the 
nucleus  of  a small  collection  of  'antiques  about 
which  was  built  a class  in  drawing.  Joseph  Hop- 
lcinson  makes  reference  to  this  cast  of  the  Venus 
in  a letter  relative  to  Pine,  dated  May  6,  1833,  in 
which  he  says  that  the  Venus  “ was  kept  shut  up  in 
a case  and  only  shown  to  persons  who  particularly 
wished  to  see  it;  as  the  manners  of  our  country  at 
that  time  would  not  tolerate  a public  exhibition  of 
such  a figure.  This  fact  alone  shows  our  progress 
in  civilization  and  the  arts.” 

Peale  attempted  also  a school  for  the  living 
figure  — a life-class  — and  thereby  hangs  one  of 
the  most  amusing  tales  of  the  artist’s  gritty  deter- 
mination in  the  face  of  seemingly  insurmountable 
obstacles.  Philadelphia  had  no  Piazza  di  Spagna, 
with  groups  of  professional  models,  and  Peale, 
finding  nobody  who  would  exhibit  his  person  for 


4 Pennsylvania  Hcabemy  ot  ffine  Brts 


hire,  whipped  off  his  frills  and  ruffleis  and  bared  his 
own  handsome  torso  to  the  class.  An  exhibition  of 
pictures  lent  by  citizens  was  opened  in  Independence 
Hall.  But  all  failed  together  — the  sculpture  hall, 
the  gallery  of  paintings  and  the  life-class. 

Still  this  busy,  tireless  worker  and  enthusiast  kept 
at  it,  and  in  the  end  must  be  recognized  as  the  mo- 
tive force  which  pressed  the  issue  of  the  ultimate 
project,  for  it  was  he  who  collected  the  meeting  of 
founders  of  which  he  was  one,  in  1805,  and  he  lived 
to  contribute  to  seventeen  of  the  annual  exhibitions 
of  the  new  institution. 

The  meeting  of  the  founders  of  The  Pennsylvania 
Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts  occurred  in  Independ- 
ence Hall,  in  the  same  room  where  twenty-seven 
years  earlier  the  forefathers  had  signed  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence.  The  room  was  then  the 
meeting  room  of  the  Continental  Congress.  It  was 
here  that  this  assemblage  of  Philadelphia’s  most 
progressive  citizens  met  and  subscribed  to  the  arti- 
cles of  agreement  providing  for  the  creation  of  an 
Art  Academy.  The  compact  exists  as  a horny 
brown  sheepskin. 

Of  the  seventy-one  who  signed  the  parchment, 
forty-one  were  lawyers;  thus  the  initial  movement 
may  be  said  to  have  come  from  the  bar,  liberally 
promoted,  however,  by  some  of  every  profession 
and  calling.  Joseph  Hopkinson,  the  accomplished 


Distortcal  Sftetcb  of  tbe  Bcabems  5 


author  of  “ Hail  Columbia/’  was  the  influence  that 
appeared  most  on  the  surface  and  conferred  the 
executive  and  cementing  strength. 

The  pledge  of  the  association  as  quaintly  ex- 
pressed in  the  language  of  the  day  was : — 

“To  promote  the  cultivation  of  the  Fine  Arts,  in 
the  United  States  of  America,  by  introducing  cor- 
rect and  elegant  copies  from  works  of  the  first 
masters  in  sculpture  and  painting  and  by  thus  facili- 
tating the  access  to  such  standards,  and  also  by 
occasionally  conferring  moderate  but  honourable 
premiums,  and  otherwise  assisting  the  studies  and 
exciting  the  efforts  of  the  artists  gradually  to  un- 
fold, enlighten  and  invigorate  the  talents  of  our 
countrymen.”  It  provided  also  for  the  selection  of 
a building  plot  “ which  it  shall  buy  or  else  take  on 
ground  rent  ” — then,  and  for  years  after,  an  in- 
stitution and  mode  of  prolonged  payment  by  usury 
on  the  soil,  peculiar  to  Philadelphia. 

The  venerable  parchment,  dated  the  twenty-sixth 
day  of  December,  1805,  is  now  among  the  treasured 
archives  of  the  Academy,  and  is  signed  as  fol- 
lows : — 

James  Oldden,  Jr.,  Henry  K.  Helmuth,  John 
Redman  Coxe,  Will  Poyntell,  Jos.  Reed,  Peter  S. 
Du  Ponceau,  W.  Lewis,  William  Tilghman,  Sam- 
son Levi,  Thos.  Ballou  Zantzinger,  Henry  Pratt, 
John  B.  Wallace,  Thomas  Wiedman,  Lewis  Niell, 


6 Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  jfine  Hrts 


Samuel  Meeker,  John  K.  Helmuth,  Charles  Smith, 
Joseph  Lownes,  Edw.  Penington,  D.  Watts,  Edw. 
Burd,  William  Smith,  James  Hopkins,  Benjn.  R. 
Morgan,  John  Hallowell,  John  R.  Coates,  Plun.  F. 
Glentworth,  Philip  Wager,  Peter  Wager,  James 
Tatem,  Walter  Kerr,  Wm.  Rush,  Jacob  S.  Wain, 
Henry  Kuhl,  C.  Wn.  Peale,  Rem.  Peale,  Charles 
Clark,  Andw.  Bayard,  T.  P.  Garesche,  George 
Clymer,  W.  Rawle,  Jos.  Hopkinson,  Simon  Gratz, 
Geo.  Fox,  Chs.  Chauncey,  Charles  Swift,  Sami. 
Ewer,  Thomas  Bradford,  Jun.,  Wilson  Hunt, 
Moses  Levy,  J.  B.  McKean,  A.  J.  Dallas,  William 
H.  Tod,  Hor.  Binney,  Richard  Rush,  C.  W.  Fraser, 
John  Read,  Jun.,  James  Gibson,  Wm.  Meredith,  J. 
Dorsey,  W.  S.  Biddle,  Richd.  Peters,  Jun.,  Walter 
Franklin,  Samuel  Shoemaker,  Mahlon  Dickerson, 
J.  W.  Condy,  Zalegman  Phillips,  Peter  A.  Brown, 
Robt.  Frazer,  James  Milnor,  Chas.  Biddle. 

The  election  of  officers  held  in  the  State  House 
constituted  George  Clymer,  a signer  of  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence,  president  of  the  new  asso- 
ciation, and  as  directors,  William  Tilghman,  Will- 
iam Rawle,  Moses  Levy,  Joseph  Hopkinson,  Joseph 
B.  McKean,  William  Meredith,  William  Rush,  John 
R.  Coxe,  M.  D.,  John  Dorsey,  William  Poyntell, 
Thomas  C.  James,  M.  D.,  and  Charles  Willson 
Peale.  Two,  Rush  and  Peale,  were  artists  by  pro- 
fession ; seven  were  members  of  the  bar. 


Ibistorical  Sfeetcb  of  tbe  Hcabems  7 


Mr.  Clymer  continued  in  office  from  1805  until 
his  death,  in  1813,  when  Judge  Joseph  Hopkinson 
was  elected  to  the  presidency,  and  served  the  insti- 
tution until  1842,  a period  of  twenty-nine  years. 
Their  successors  have  been:  Joseph  Dugan,  1842- 
1845 1 Edward  L.  Carey,  1845 J Joseph  R.  Inger- 
soll,  1846-1852;  Henry  D.  Gilpin,  1852-1859; 
Caleb  Cope,  1859-1871 ; James  L.  Claghorn,  1872- 
1884;  George  S.  Pepper,  1884-1890;  Edward  H. 
Coates,  1890-1906;  Henry  Whelen,  1906-1907; 
John  Frederick  Lewis,  1907. 

The  early  meetings  of  the  directors  were  held  at 
the  residence  of  Judge  Hopkinson  and  it  was  there 
on  July  1,  1805,  it  was  “Resolved,  That  from  a 
high  respect  entertained  for  the  genius,  talents  and 
distinguished  fame  of  our  countryman,  Benjamin 
West,  he  be  elected  an  honorary  member  of  this 
Academy.”  The  Pennsylvanian  prodigy  was  at  this 
time  sixty-seven  years  old  and  at  that  painful  period 
of  his  life  when  he  was  beginning  to  realize  the 
decline  of  his  popularity  and  his  powers.  He  was 
still  president  of  the  Royal  Academy,  but  the  patron- 
age of  royalty  which  he  had  enjoyed  for  years  was 
promptly  withdrawn  when  King  George  III  became 
incapacitated  through  insanity.  At  the  same  time, 
and  for  the  same  cause,  he  was  ordered  to  suspend 
work  upon  a series  of  thirty-six  pictures  ordered  by 
the  King  for  Windsor  Chapel. 


8 Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fftne  Brts 


The  compliment  tendered  him  by  the  new  acad- 
emy was  timely  and  he  was  touched  by  it.  His 
reply  to  the  letter  of  the  Board  came  along  in  a 
few  weeks,  prolix,  graceful,  stately.  He  begins: 
“ Be  assured,  gentlemen,  that  that  election  I shall 
ever  retain  as  an  honour  from  a relative;  ” he  pre- 
dicts that  the  next  great  school  of  fine  arts  after 
Greece,  Italy  and  Flanders  will  be  in  the  United 
States  and  wishes  that  Philadelphia  “ may  be  as 
much  celebrated  for  her  galleries  of  paintings  by 
the  native  genius  of  the  country  as  she  is  distin- 
guished by  the  virtues  of  her  people,  and  that  she 
may  be  looked  up  to  as  the  Athens  of  the  Western 
World  in  all  that  can  give  polish  to  the  human 
mind.” 

He  is  especially  solicitous  that  America  shall  fol- 
low the  great  kingdoms  of  Europe  in  filling  her 
galleries  with  works  of  painters  native  not  foreign. 
In  a sly  corner  of  his  letter  he  recites  a fact  that 
was  partly  an  encouragement  to  the  young  institu- 
tion and  partly  an  exhibition  of  charming  vanity. 
When  Alderman  Boydell’s  great  Shakespeare  Gal- 
lery was  broken  up  in  London,  Robert  Fulton,  in- 
ventor and  artist,  remembering  his  Pennsylvania 
birth,  had  bought,  along  with  other  paintings  which 
he  deposited  in  the  Academy,  West’s  two  contribu- 
tions to  the  Boydell  collection  — “ Lear  in  the 
Storm  ” and  “ Ophelia  before  the  King  and  Queen.” 


Historical  Sketch  of  tbe  Hcahemp  9 


The  fine  old  painter’s  acknowledgments  are  accom- 
panied with  a polite  little  note  “ by  favour  of 
Colonel  Williamson  ” to  the  members  of  the  com- 
mittee who  had  corresponded  with  him. 

West  in  these  missives,  which  still  exist,  writes 
a very  good  hand,  erases  a good  deal  and  ex- 
presses himself  with  cumbrous  formality,  mitigated 
by  liberties  taken  with  the  King’s  English.  After 
West,  the  next  honorary  members  were  Robert 
Fulton  and  Bushrod  Washington. 

Having  secured  in  West  a lion,  the  directors  gave 
their  attention  to  the  question  of  housing  the  Acad- 
emy, and  at  a little  convocation  at  Judge  Hopkin- 
son’s,  July  8,  1805,  a building  committee  composed 
of  Messrs.  Rush,  P'oyntell  and  Dorsey  was  author- 
ized to  act,  and  a site  was  selected  on  the  north  side 
of  Chestnut  Street  between  Tenth  and  Eleventh 
Streets. 

The  first  Academy  building  at  Tenth  and  Chest- 
nut Streets,  destroyed  by  fire  in  1845,  was  attrib- 
uted to  Benjamin  Henry  Latrobe,  a lover  of  classic 
architecture  and  the  author  of  the  old  Philadelphia 
Water  Works  in  Centre  Square  and  of  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Bank.  It  was  in  the  Greek  style,  simple  and 
impressive.  Broad  marble  steps  led  up  to  a portico 
whose  pediment  was  supported  by  a pair  of  Ionic 
columns,  of  just  model  and  imposing  height.  The 
stairway  had  a few  severe  ornaments.  On  the 


io  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


cheek  blocks  were  a couple  of  square  termini  fin- 
ished by  two  marble  heads,  a colossal  Napoleon, 
after  Canova,  and  a Franklin  by  Ceracchi. 

The  Ceres  over  the  doorway  of  the  present  build- 
ing stood  in  a corner  of  the  courtyard  under  the 
shade  of  the  largest  hawthorn  tree  in  America. 

Early  in  1806  the  first  loan  was  solicited  for 
finishing  the  building.  This  was  divided  into  thirty 
shares  of  one  hundred  dollars  each,  to  be  refunded 
out  of  the  earliest  receipts. 

Before  securing  a repository,  however,  the  new 
directors  turned  their  attention  to  providing  for  its 
contents.  Hopkinson  and  Peale  had  heard  of 
Napoleon’s  patronage  of  the  short-lived  art  school 
of  New  York,  which  had  received  through  the  in- 
tervention of  Chancellor  Livingston,  the  American 
ambassador  in  Paris,  a dozen  plaster  casts  from 
the  statuary  assembled  in  the  Louvre. 

At  that  time  Nicholas  Biddle,  the  future  finan- 
cier, was  in  Paris.  He  was,  at  the  age  of  eighteen 
years,  secretary  of  the  legation  with  the  American 
minister,  General  Armstrong,  had  carried  off  early 
honours  from  two  colleges  and  was  the  most  daz- 
zling young  diplomat  in  Europe.  The  directors 
wrote  to  Minister  Armstrong  detailing  their  wants, 
and  enclosed  a full  explanation,  with  lists  of  selec- 
tion, to  his  precocious  secretary. 

The  lad  replied  with  ease  and  intelligence,  re- 


Ibistortcal  Sketch  of  the  Ecafcems  11 


placing  the  directors’  catalogue  with  a list  of 
statues  in  his  opinion  most  worthy  of  reproduction 
— a selection  made  with  the  advice  of  “ the  best 
statuary  in  Paris  ” (Houdon)  and  directing  the 
exportation  with  excellent  judgment.  On  his  re- 
turn to  America  he  was  made  a member  of  the 
board. 

All  this  was  at  a time  when  Napoleon,  flushed 
with  the  victories  of  his  glorious  campaigns,  was 
in  the  midst  of  amassing  the  great  but  short-lived 
Musee  Napoleon.  Each  victory  and  treaty  of  peace 
with  the  conquered  foreign  powers  brought  in  its 
train  a vast  importation,  to  Paris,  of  the  trophies 
of  war.  The  statuary  of  which  young  Biddle  wrote 
glowingly  in  his  advice  to  the  directors  had  until 
lately  been  precious  exhibits  of  the  Vatican  at  Rome. 

The  correspondence  of  Nicholas  Biddle  names 
the  marbles  copied  for  the  Academy,  under  the 
superintendence  of  a distinguished  Italian  artist, 
and  included  the  Apollo,  the  Antinous  of  the  Belve- 
dere, the  Laocoon,  the  Torso  Belvedere  and  the 
Meleager.  From  the  Campidoglio  in  Rome  had 
been  taken  the  Capitoline  Venus,  the  Dying  Gladia- 
tor and  the  Antinous  of  the  Capitol.  The  antiques 
which  Mr.  Biddle  notes  as  then  in  the  Louvre,  and 
which  still  remain  there,  include  the  Fighting 
Gladiator,  Hermaphrodite,  Silenus  and  Bacchus, 
Jason  and  Germanicus. 


12  Pennsylvania  HcaDemy  of  jftne  arts 


Napoleon,  who  appears  to  have  thought  of  every- 
thing, took  prudent  pains  to  have  moulds  made  of 
these  statues  as  soon  as  they  were  received,  antici- 
pating, we  must  suppose,  a possible  Act  of  Restitu- 
tion, which  was  realized  in  1815,  when  the  originals 
were  for  the  most  part  restored  to  their  rightful 
owners  and  the  matrices  were  all  that  France  could 
retain  of  her  rich  booty. 

The  Emperor  was  glad  to  facilitate  the  study  of 
these  statues  and  readily  consented  to  a fulfilment 
of  the  order  from  Philadelphia.  The  French  bill  of 
lading  accompanying  the  invoices  from  “ Getti, 
Mouleur  du  Louvre  ” particularizes  over  fifty  ob- 
jects including,  besides  those  named,  an  ecorche,  or 
anatomical  figure,  by  Houdon,  and  many  busts  and 
fragments.  It  is  dated  the  20  Primaire,  an.  14. 
The  expenses,  based  upon  the  reasonable  rates  es- 
tablished by  the  administration  of  the  Louvre, 
amounted  to  francs  2887.30,  including  “ Pour- 
boires  des  cordeurs  et  chargeurs,  francs  6.”  In 
February,  1806,  before  the  Academy  had  a corpor- 
ate existence,  the  cases  were  shipped  from  Bor- 
deaux. 

The  Pennsylvania  Academy  received  its  charter 
March  28,  1806.  It  describes  the  erection  of  a 
building  then  in  progress.  The  founders  had 
pliable  notions  of  the  interpretation  of  the  term 
Academy,  and  their  charter  made  no  mention  of 


Historical  Sketch  of  tbe  Ecabems  13 


the  functions  of  a school.  Statuary  receives  the 
primary  consideration  and  the  need  of  an  edifice  to 
display  “ sculpture  and  other  works  of  art,”  is  in- 
sisted upon. 

By  the  close  of  the  year  the  building  was  prac- 
tically ready  for  occupancy.  Its  main  feature  was 
a handsome  circular  room  with  a dome,  in  the  style 
of  the  Pantheon. 

In  March,  1806,  the  charter  obtained,  the  rotunda 
completed,  the  antiques  installed  and  West’s  Shake- 
spearian paintings  hung  upon  the  wall  with  other 
European  canvases,  the  directors  felt  that  an  ex- 
hibition was  in  order,  and  the  Academy  was  form- 
ally opened  to  the  public.  President  Clymer  deliv- 
ered the  address.  The  public  paid  twenty-five  cents 
a head  to  enter,  and  the  Mondays,  in  consideration 
of  the  unblushing  character  of  the  casts  from  the 
Louvre,  were  set  apart,  “ with  tender  gallantry,  for 
ladies  exclusively.” 

The  collection  grew  by  slow  but  permanent 
degrees.  It  became  the  custom  to  give  or  bequeath 
works  of  art,  to  be  displayed  in  the  “ elegant  halls 
on  Chestnut  Street.”  The  first  present  acknowl- 
edged was  a copy  of  the  silver-gilt  medal  of  Com- 
modore Preble,  executed  by  order  of  Congress,  and 
presented  by  Tench  Coxe  in  1807.  In  the  same 
year,  Joseph  Allen  Smith  presented  a valuable  part 
of  his  large  foreign  collection.  In  1809  Mr.  Solo- 


14  ©ennsBivania  Hcabemp  of  jFine  arts 


mon  gave  an  antique  mosaic  and  Mr.  Richard  Bache 
deposited  a portrait  of  William  Penn’s  father,  the 
Admiral. 

In  1810  General  Armstrong,  the  returned  min- 
ister to  France,  presented  some  valuable  books  and 
a further  collection  of  official  casts  from  the 
Louvre,  received  from  the  Emperor.  A few  of  the 
Bonaparte  casts  have  survived  the  chances  of  fire 
and  accident,  and  rank  much  higher,  on  account 
of  their  sharpness  and  precision,  than  the  later  casts 
by  which  the  destroyed  specimens  have  been  re- 
placed. In  1816,  it  is  a little  curious  to  find  a young 
Philadelphia  traveller,  Mr.  Montgomery,  struck 
with  the  Venus  de  Medici,  once  more  established  in 
the  Tribune  of  the  Uffizi  Gallery  in  Florence,  and 
sending  home  an  Italian  cast  of  her  to  Philadelphia. 
Mr.  Wycoff  gave  small  marble  reproductions  of  the 
same  figure  and  of  the  Antinous,  and  Clodion’s 
graceful  bacchantes  of  the  Louvre  were  repeated 
for  the  Academy  in  small  marble  duplicates.  A 
rich  bronze  or  two,  a few  genuine  old  ceramics  and 
curiosities,  came  into  possession,  and  the  Academy 
became  a suggestive  and  stimulating  museum,  with 
a series  of  antiques  unparalleled  in  the  New  World, 
some  genuine  old  masters,  and  plenty  of  decorations 
and  rarities. 

The  year  1811  was  one  of  emphatic  prosperity  to 
the  institution.  This  was  the  year  of  the  first  an- 


Historical  Sftetcb  of  tbe  Bcabems  15 


nual  exhibition,  given  in  conjunction  with  the 
Society  of  Artists.  Judge  Hopkinson  delivered  the 
opening  oration.  Wertmuller,  the  painter,  contrib- 
uted a figure  of  Ceres ; Krimmel  sent  several  paint- 
ings and  amongst  the  landscapes  were  some  by 
Thomas  Birch. 

The  young  association  continued  to  receive  dona- 
tions. About  this  time  the  remnant  of  the  collection 
of  Joseph  Allen  Smith  was  despatched  from  Italy. 
Twenty-one  paintings  and  fifty-two  engravings 
were  put  on  an  American  ship,  The  Marquis  de 
Someruclas.  The  vessel  was  captured  by  a British 
cruiser  and  steered  into  port  at  Halifax.  The  treat- 
ment of  the  Academy’s  application  to  recover  its 
consignment,  at  a time  when  swarms  of  American 
privateers  were  driving  the  English  merchantmen, 
gutted  and  lamed,  into  every  port  of  Britain,  is  a 
creditable  bit  of  magnanimity  and  a bright  little 
episode  in  the  war  of  1812.  The  judgment,  deliv- 
ered in  the  court  of  vice-admiralty  at  Halifax,  by 
the  Honourable  Alexander  Croke,  Doctor  of  Laws, 
is  not  only  a handsome  piece  of  justice,  liberally 
interpreted,  but  is  a most  delicious  revelation  of 
provincial  eloquence  making  the  most  of  its  oppor- 
tunity. Mr.  Croke,  in  liberal  periods,  defends  the 
rights  of  Art  and  Science  to  protection  in  the  times 
of  war.  “ Heaven  forbid,”  is  his  pious  aspiration, 
“ that  such  an  application  to  the  generosity  of  Great 


16  Pennsylvania  BcaOemy  of  fftne  Brts 


Britain  should  ever  be  ineffectual ! ” The  Corsican 
tyrant  himself,  remembers  Mr.  Croke,  has  recog- 
nized the  exceptional  privileges  of  art:  “Not  to 
mention  the  innumerable  cases  of  the  mutual  exer- 
cise of  this  courtesy  between  nations  in  former  wars. 
Even  the  present  Governor  of  France,  under  whose 
control  that  country  has  fallen  back  whole  centuries 
in  barbarism,  whilst  he  has  trampled  on  justice  and 
humanity,  has  attended  to  the  claims  of  science.” 
He  gives  an  instance : “ A gentleman,  a Fellow  of 
the  Royal  Society,  was  unfortunately  one  of  the 
persons  so  unjustly  detained  at  Paris  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  war.  Considerable  interest  was 
excited  through  the  medium  of  the  British  Gov- 
ernment to  procure  his  release,  but  without  effect. 
Yet  to  an  application  from  Sir  Joseph  Banks,  as 
the  president  of  the  Royal  Society,  in  favour  of  a 
member  of  that  useful  institution,  Bonaparte  paid 
immediate  attention,  and  in  the  handsomest  manner 
permitted  him  to  return  to  England.  If  such  cases 
were  unheard  of  every  Briton  would  be  anxious 
that  his  country  should  set  the  honourable  example ; 
but  I trust  that  every  British  bosom  would  blush 
with  shame  if  his  country  should  be  found  inferior 
to  the  lawless  government  of  France.”  The  orator 
finishes  off  with  a compliment  for  the  “ very  emi- 
nent American  president  of  the  Royal  Academy,” 
in  London,  and  thinks  the  day  may  shortly  come 


historical  Sketch  of  tbe  Bcabems  17 


when  the  Pennsylvania  Academy’s  influence  will 
turn  out  “ new  Wests  to  revive  the  School  of 
Rafaelle  in  the  wilds  of  America.”  The  judge  con- 
fidently foresees  a time  when  England  and  America 
“ shall  know  no  other  enmity  than  a liberal  rivalry 
in  every  elegant  and  manly  accomplishment  ” — 
and  then  decrees  restitution. 

In  1811  the  Lansdowne  portrait  of  Washington 
was  added  to  the  collection  from  the  estate  of  Will- 
iam Bingham.  About  the  same  time  Sully’s  full 
length  life-size  portrait  of  the  actor  Cooke,  as 
Richard  III,  was  purchased  by  contributions  from 
friends  and  admirers  of  the  actor  and  tendered  to 
the  Academy,  thus  forming  the  nucleus  of  the 
most  important  collection  possessed  by  the  Acad- 
emy — that  of  its  old  portraits. 

By  the  death  of  Mr.  Paul  Beck,  warden  of  the 
port  of  Philadelphia,  which  occurred  in  1844,  the 
Academy  inherited  a number  of  pictures.  Amongst 
its  historic  relics,  also,  are  four  paintings  by  Joseph 
Vernet  purchased  for  $2000  from  the  sale  of 
Joseph  Bonaparte’s  collection,  from  his  residence  in 
Bordentown  in  1845. 

By  various  acquisitions  we  find  the  Academy,  at 
the  time  of  its  destruction  by  the  famous  fire  of 
1845,  a well-equipped  institution.  The  fatal  his- 
tory of  the  fire  makes  gruesome  reading.  One 
night  a maniac,  a relative  of  the  janitress  who  kept 


18  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  ot  fine  Brts 


the  building,  was  seen  prowling  in  his  night  dress 
through  the  basement,  above  which  was  the  gallery 
of  plaster  casts.  A conflagration,  attributed  to  this 
unfortunate,  broke  out  immediately  after.  The  edi- 
fice was  greatly  injured,  and  the  more  ponderous 
contents  were  lost.  Efforts  to  save  the  collection 
were  faithfully  made.  West’s  “ Death  on  the  Pale 
Horse  ” was  hurriedly  cut  from  the  frame  “ while 
its  margins  were  blistering,”  and  escaped  serious 
damage.  A brave  fireman,  the  engines  playing  upon 
him  the  while,  slashed  it  away.  These  were  the  days 
of  volunteer  fire  brigades  in  Philadelphia,  and  it 
is  likely  that  they  damaged  more  than  they  saved. 
The  anxious  volunteers  are  pictured  by  an  enthusi- 
astic historian  as  standing  at  the  entrance  to  see 
the  devastation  completing  itself  “ among  the  irre- 
placeable treasures.”  The  horned  head  of  Petrich’s 
“ Mephistopheles  ” crumbling  away  in  laughter  and 
flames  — a congenial  end.  “ Milo  ” perished  once 
more  at  the  stake.  Behind  the  high  flame  gilded 
silhouette  of  the  Centaurs,  they  saw,  when  too  late 
to  save,  the  curling  and  shrivelling  of  a noble  can- 
vas by  Murillo,  bought  in  Spain  from  the  collection 
of  Joseph  Bonaparte.  This  lost  to  our  country  a 
Murillo  of  great  price — a representation  of  the 
“ Carita  Romana.”  “ The  Battle  of  the  Centaurs  ” 
lived  through  the  disaster  and  now  ornaments  the 
present  building. 


Distorical  Sfeetcb  of  tbe  Hcabemp  19 


The  Academy  was  rebuilt  upon  the  old  site  and 
after  the  old  model  and  served  the  institution  until 
its  removal  to  the  present  location,  when  the  old 
building,  still  devoted  to  the  purposes  of  art,  became 
Fox’s  Theatre  and  was  subsequently  transformed 
out  of  all  semblance  of  its  original  form,  and  has 
been  gradually  forgotten. 

By  the  year  1870,  the  requirements  of  the  Acad- 
emy had  outgrown  the  conditions  of  the  beginning 
of  the  century  and  a new  site  on  Broad  Street  was 
decided  upon.  At  noon  on  the  22nd  of  April,  1876, 
the  new  edifice  was  opened  for  the  first  time.  The 
building  was  the  design  of  Messrs.  Furness  and 
Hewitt,  and  has  a frontage  of  one  hundred  feet 
and  a depth  of  two  hundred  and  sixty-five  feet. 
The  construction  was  under  the  direction  of  Fair- 
man  Rogers,  John  Sartain,  Henry  C.  Gibson,  Henry 
G.  Morris  and  Matthew  Baird.  The  cost  was 
$543,000,  of  which  $140,000  was  received  from 
the  sale  of  the  Chestnut  Street  property,  and 
$33,000  received  under  the  will  of  Henry  D.  Gilpin, 
the  sixth  president  of  the  Academy,  was  to  be  de- 
voted to  the  installation  of  the  Gilpin  Gallery. 

The  remaining  sum  of  $370,000,  together  with 
the  $100,000  necessary  for  equipment  and  various 
expenses,  was  contributed  at  the  solicitation  of 
James  L.  Claghorn,  who  was  elected  president  in 
1872,  and  to  whose  untiring  energy  the  achieve- 


20  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  of  jflne  arts 


firood  JrFeef* 

GROUND  PLAN  OF  THE  ACADEMY. 


Historical  Sfeetcb  ot  tbe  Bcabems  21 


ment  of  the  present  building  is  most  largely  due. 
The  subscription  list  includes  twenty-five  payments 
of  $10,000,  fifteen  of  $5000,  fourteen  of  $2500, 
twelve  of  $2000,  and  eighty-six  of  $1000. 

About  this  time  there  appears  upon  the  records  of 
the  institution  the  name  of  Mr.  Edward  H.  Coates, 
to  whom  much  of  the  contemporary  achievement  of 
the  Academy  is  directly  due.  Mr.  Coates  served  the 
Academy  in  various  capacities  for  a period  of 
twenty-nine  years,  from  1877,  when  he  became  a 
member  of  the  Board,  to  1906,  when,  having  com- 
pleted a term  of  sixteen  years  as  president  of  the 
institution,  he  resigned  from  active  service. 

In  1876  Mr.  Fairman  Rogers,  Professor  Schus- 
sele  and  Mr.  Thomas  Eakins  established  the  new 
school,  the  best,  as  it  was  the  only  live  one  in  Amer- 
ica. 

In  the  year  1886  the  endowment  of  the  institu- 
tion was  undertaken  and  $100,000  was  subscribed 
towards  an  invested  fund  for  this  purpose.  This 
has  since  been  more  than  doubled,  the  greater  part 
of  the  increase  having  come  to  the  Academy  under 
the  will  of  George  S.  Pepper,  its  ninth  president, 
whose  wealth  was  munificently  bequeathed  - to  the 
great  charities  and  public  institutions  of  Phila- 
delphia. 

In  1887  the  Loan  Collection  of  Historic  Portraits 
was  organized,  largely  through  the  efforts  of  Mr. 


22  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  of  fine  arts 


Charles  Henry  Hart,  then  chairman  of  the  exhibi- 
tion committee,  a post  he  filled  with  efficiency 
throughout  the  twenty  years  of  his  sendees  to  the 
Academy,  from  1882  to  1902.  The  catalogue  of  the 
loan  exhibition  was  the  work  of  Mr.  Hart  and 
having  been  prepared  with  utmost  care  becomes 
yearly  of  increasing  value. 

Mr.  Coates  coming  to  the  chair  in  1890,  marks 
one  of  the  most  important  happenings  between  that 
year  and  1850  — the  establishment  of  strong, 
mutual  and  lasting  relations  between  the  Academy 
and  the  artists  of  Philadelphia  and  the  United 
States.  This  was  accomplished  through  the  recon- 
struction of  the  Annual  Exhibition  on  a new  and 
modern  basis,  compatible  with  the  dignity  of  the 
institution  and  the  growing  importance  of  the  pro- 
fession in  this  country. 

Toward  this  end,  the  exhibition  of  1890  was  put 
into  the  care  and  charge  of  a strong  artists’  jury, 
and  the  first  of  the  annual  private  views  and  in- 
augural receptions  was  given.  Mr.  William  T. 
Richards  and  Mr.  Alexander  Harrison  were  guests 
of  honour  and  the  management  made  the  important 
purchases,  for  the  Temple  Collection,  of  Davis’ 
“ The  Brook  ” and  Harrison’s  “ The  Wave.” 

The  next  year  Mr.  Harrison  S.  Morris  was  asked 
to  assist  in  advertising  and  exploiting  the  Academy 
and  the  exhibition,  and  the  year  following,  he  was 


Historical  Sfeetcb  of  tbe  Bcabems  23 


invited  to  take  thei  position  of  managing  director, 
which  the  Board  created  for  him.  His  valuable 
services  to  the  Academy,  especially  to  the  exhibi- 
tions, continued  until  his  resignation  in  1905. 

About  1892,  Mr.  Robert  Vonnoh  was  asked  to 
become  chief  instructor  in  the  schools,  and  this  was 
the  beginning  of  a new  epoch  there.  The  faculty, 
with  the  chairman  of  the  committee  on  instruction 
at  its  head,  was  put  in  full  charge  of  the  manage- 
ment of  that  department.  Dr.  John  H.  Packard  was 
made  the  first  chairman  of  the  committee  on  in- 
struction under  the  new  regime  and  continued  his 
valuable  services  until  his  recent  death. 

The  Cresson  Endowment,  in  memory  of  William 
Emlen  Cresson,  an  Academician  of  The  Pennsyl- 
vania Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts,  provided  by  the 
wills  of  his  parents,  resulted  in  the  most  far  reach- 
ing and  splendid  provision  for  foreign  study  en- 
joyed by  any  institution.  Prior  to  its  becoming 
operative,  Mr.  Charles  Hare  Hutchinson,  for  a 
number  of  years,  had  provided  for  an  annual 
scholarship  fund  for  study  abroad. 

In  1905  a scheme  for  establishing  in  the  Academy 
a Gallery  of  National  Portraiture  was  prepared 
and  a circular  issued  by  the  president  in  which  the 
public  was  asked  to  cooperate  in  an  effort  to  extend 
and  develop  the  already  important  collection  of 
historic  portraits,  first,  by  adding  to  the  series  of 


24  ipennssivmnta  Bca&entE  ot  fftne  Brts 


portraits  of  founders  and  makers  of  the  Republic, 
of  the  State  of  Pennsylvania,  and  of  the  City  of 
Philadelphia,  and  of  the  men  and  women  notable  in 
American  literature,  science,  the  arts  and  social  life. 
Secondly,  to  include  in  the  permanent  gallery  por- 
traits of  those  of  any  other  country  or  state  who 
have  been  eminent  in  the  history  or  affairs  of  the 
United  States  or  whose  achievement  or  service  has 
given  universal  reputation. 

This  circular  was  issued  in  February,  1904,  and 
the  exhibition,  under  the  title  “ Gallery  of  Ameri- 
can Portraiture,”  was  held  in  November  and  De- 
cember, 1905,  and  numbered  one  hundred  and  forty- 
six  exhibits,  of  which  about  one-half  were  lent  and 
the  other  half  belonged  to  the  Academy’s  collec- 
tion. The  result  of  this  movement  was  to  stimulate 
interest  in  the  Gallery  of  Historic  Portraits  owned 
by  the  Academy  and  the  accession  of  several  addi- 
tions to  the  permanent  collection. 

The  works  of  art  belonging  to  the  Academy  have 
been  gradually  accumulated  by  purchase,  gift  and 
bequest  during  the  past  one  hundred  and  six  years. 
The  Carey  Collection  was  formed  by  Edward  L. 
Carey,  the  fourth  president  of  the  Academy,  and 
one  of  the  earliest  patrons  of  art  in  this  country. 
Mr.  Carey  had  married  a sister  of  Charles  Robert 
Leslie,  and  it  was  with  the  aid  of  the  latter  that  the 
examples  of  the  earlier  British  school  of  painters 


Ibtstorical  Sfeetcb  ot  tbe  Hcabemg  25 


were  obtained.  These,  with  a number  of  the  works 
of  American  artists,  chiefly  sentimental  pictures  of 
the  type  which  the  French  call  genre,  constitute  the 
collection  which  was  bequeathed  to  the  late  Henry 
C.  Carey  and  from  him  purchased  by  the  Academy. 

The  Temple  Collection  is  the  result  of  a founda- 
tion established  in  1880  by  Joseph  E.  Temple,  a di- 
rector of  the  Academy.  Under  the  provisions  of  a 
deed  of  trust  executed  by  him,  a fund  of  sixty  thou- 
sand dollars  is  set  aside  and  invested,  one-half  of  the 
annual  income  to  be  devoted  to  the  current  expenses 
of  the  institution,  and  one-half,  or  the  sum  of 
eighteen  hundred  dollars,  to  be  appropriated  annu- 
ally for  the  acquirement  of  pictures  and  the  award 
of  the  Temple  medal,  both  purchases  and  award 
being  specifically  limited  to  the  work  of  American 
artists  shown  in  the  exhibitions  of  the  Academy. 
The  collection  now  includes  about  sixty  paintings. 

The  Gibson  Collection  was  received  in  1896  in 
accordance  with  the  bequest  of  Henry  C.  Gibson,  a 
director  and  vice-president  of  the  Academy,  who 
died  in  1890.  It  consists  of  five  pieces  of  sculpture 
and  ninety-eight  paintings  which  are  principally 
examples  of  contemporary  French  and  German  art. 
The  collection  is  arranged  in  galleries  C and  D, 
which  have  been  completely  furnished  by  Mrs.  R.  H. 
C.  Brock  and  Miss  Mary  K.  Gibson,  the  daughters 
of  the  donor,  the  sum  of  ten  thousand  dollars  having 


26  Pennsylvania  Bca&enty  of  fine  Brts 

also  been  provided  as  a permanent  fund  for  the 
care  of  the  paintings  and  the  renewal  of  the  frames. 

The  Field  collection  of  paintings,  chiefly  of  works 
painted  before  the  nineteenth  century,  was  received 
in  1887  from  Mrs.  John  W.  Field,  a daughter  of 
Richard  Peters,  Jr.,  one  of  the  founders  of  the 
Academy.  In  accordance  with  the  deed  of  transfer 
it  is  hung  permanently  upon  the  west  wall  of  the 
Print  Room,  and  is  the  gift  of  John  W.  Field  and 
his  wife. 

The  Print  Room  also  contains  about  sixty  thou- 
sand engravings  and  etchings  collected  by  the  late 
John  S.  Phillips  and  bequeathed  by  him  to  the 
Academy,  together  with  an  endowment  of  twelve 
thousand  dollars  for  the  care  and  increase  of  the 
collection. 

On  May  2,  1910,  the  galleries  were  further  en- 
riched by  a collection  of  thirteen  pictures  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  French,  German,  Italian  and 
American  painters,  presented  by  Caroline  Gibson 
Tait,  a sister  of  Henry  C.  Gibson. 

The  general  collections  of  the  Academy  are  es- 
pecially rich  along  the  lines  of  the  institution’s  nor- 
mal growth  as  a patron  of  contemporary  art  and 
a museum  for  its  conservation. 

The  founding  of  the  Academy  occurred  in  the 
midst  of  flourishing  times,  when  Philadelphia  after 
having  been  ten  years  the  capital  of  the  nation  was 


tbistortcal  Sfeetcb  of  tbe  Bcabems  27 


still  the  scene  of  a brilliant  society  under  whose 
patronage  arts  and  letters  thrived  and  blossomed. 

Philadelphia  was  the  birthplace  of  several  of  our 
earliest  painters  and  sculptors  and  at  some  time  the 
residence  of  practically  every  one  of  importance. 
From  this  grew  the  need  of  an  Academy  whose 
birth  and  early  development  in  the  patronage  and 
acquisition  of  Americana,  were  as  natural  as  is  the 
coming  of  the  flowers  that  bloom  in  the  spring. 

By  reason  of  their  logical  growth  these  collec- 
tions of  early  native  paintings  and  sculpture  will 
always  be  the  most  valuable,  as  they  are  the  most 
interesting,  of  the  Academy’s  possessions. 

This  is  particularly  true  of  the  noble  group  of 
portraits  by  Gilbert  Stuart  — that  remarkable  an- 
cestral picture  gallery  of  Philadelphia’s  wit,  beauty 
and  genius  — to  which  logical  sequence  have  been 
added  equally  fitting  examples  of  Sully,  Neagle, 
Inman,  Peale  and  the  minor  painters  — a collection 
as  rich  in  historic  portraiture  as  it  is  in  historic 
art. 

Perhaps  more  than  anything  else  the  Centennial 
Exhibition  of  1876  awakened  consciousness  in  our 
art  and  in  the  conduct  of  the  museum  by  bringing 
the  reality  of  foreign  life  before  the  American 
people  and  making  the  first  break  in  our  national 
provincialism.  The  building  of  the  new  Academy, 
which  occurred  in  the  same  year  as  the  opening  of 


28  Pennsylvania  BcaOeniy  ot*  jfine  Brts 


the  Centennial,  aroused  new  interest  and  fresh  am- 
bitions in  the  minds  of  its  patrons.  But  now  it  was 
in  a more  sophisticated  direction  and  as  interest  in 
native  talent  gave  way  to  a worship  of  the  imported 
product,  so  American  art,  as  such,  languished  for 
lack  of  sustenance  and  passed  into  a state  of  vacu- 
ous imitation  and  little  of  moment  was  produced. 

The  Academy’s  records,  at  this  period,  note  the 
receipt  by  gift,  and  otherwise,  of  numerous  ex- 
hibits from  the  Centennial  Exposition,  the  ques- 
tionable nature  of  whose  influence  can  be  judged 
by  the  aridity  of  these  contributions. 

Though  the  wisdom  of  Mr.  Temple,  at  his  death, 
four  years  later,  provided  for  the  continuance  of 
the  patronage  of  American  artists,  we  have  never 
entirely  recovered  from  the  disturbance  of  this 
influx  of  foreign  art,  and  the  contemporary  collec- 
tion acquired  with  the  income  of  the  Temple  be- 
quest is  an  inadequate  continuance  of  the  earlier 
groups. 

Confidence  once  destroyed  is  slowly  regained,  but 
with  the  richness  of  the  present  output  of  distin- 
guished native  artists  and  the  increasing  respect 
which  they  command  at  home  and  abroad,  has  come 
a revival  of  public  interest  and  public  faith,  and  the 
present  generation  of  painters  and  sculptors  will 
be  an  epoch-making  one  to  the  glory  of  American 
art. 


CHAPTER  II 


EARLY  EXHIBITIONS 

The  early  exhibitions  of  The  Pennsylvania 
Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts  were  at  the  instigation 
and  under  the  auspices  of  the  Society  of  Artists  of 
the  United  States,  a society  formed  in  1810  “ on  en- 
lightened and  liberal  principles,  in  order  to  collect, 
as  it  were,  into  a focus,  the  various  talents  and 
resources  of  artists;  and  by  such  an  institution  to 
give  a character  to  the  fine  arts  in  America/’ 

The  literature  on  the  subject  of  the  founding 
and  early  history  of  this  society,  to  be  found  in  the 
old  records  preserved  by  the  Academy,  is  as  quaint 
as  it  is  interesting.  The  report  of  a committee 
appointed  to  examine  into  the  rise,  progress  and 
present  state  of  the  Society  of  Artists  of  the  United 
States,  read  April  15,  1812,  and  printed  for  the 
same  society,  contains  much  interesting  material 
and  proves  that  the  founding  of  the  Academy  had 
not  passed  without  some  ill  feeling  in  the  breasts 
of  the  fraternity. 

The  following  is  quoted  from  the  report : — 

" In  1805,  a number  of  gentlemen  of  Philadel- 
29 


30  Pennsylvania  Hcabemy  of  fftne  Hrts 


phia  undertook  to  establish  an  institution  in  this 
city,  under  the  title  of  The  Pennsylvania  Academy 
of  the  Fine  Arts.  A considerable  sum  was  raised 
by  subscription ; a building  was  erected  and  a num- 
ber of  antique  statues,  busts,  etc.,  were  procured 
from  Paris.  To  the  zeal  and  activity  of  Joseph 
Hopkinson,  Esq.,  the  citizens  of  Philadelphia  are 
much  indebted  for  a speedy  completion  of  the  in- 
stitution which  was  opened  to  the  public  in  April, 
1807.  Some  valuable  pictures  were  loaned  to  the 
Academy  by  Robert  Fulton,  Esq.,  and  others,  but 
the  principal  articles  which  constituted  their  exhi- 
bition were  the  statues  and  busts. 

“ The  subscribers  to  the  Academy,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  two  artists,  were  merely  amateurs.  Phil- 
adelphia at  that  time  contained  a number  of  artists 
of  high  standing  in  the  different  departments  of  art 
and,  from  the  circumstances  of  their  not  having 
received  invitations  to  join  the  Academy,  they 
concluded  amongst  themselves  that  the  institution 
was  intended  merely  for  a museum,  and  conse- 
quently not  likely  to  become  of  much  importance, 
either  in  the  improvement  of  artists  or  in  correct- 
ing the  public  taste(!).  The  artists  have  ever 
deprecated  the  idea  of  an  exhibition  of  antique 
statues,  such  being  only  useful  to  students,  and 
never  have  in  any  other  country  formed  a public 
exhibition.  It  has  been  considered  as  extremely 


jfiarlg  ^xbtbiUons 


31 


indecorous  and  altogether  inconsistent  with  the 
purity  of  republican  morals.” 

The  constitution  of  the  Society  was  signed  by 
upwards  of  sixty  persons  and  the  members  were 
invited  to  hold  their  meetings  in  The  Pennsylvania 
Academy.  Within  six  months  the  membership 
mounted  to  about  one  hundred.  Various  efforts 
were  made  from  time  to  time  to  bring  about  the 
union  of  the  Academy  and  the  Society,  but  the 
most  that  was  ever  accomplished  was  an  agreement 
entered  into  by  both,  which  provided  for  the  first 
of  the  Annual  Exhibitions,  which  was  opened  on 
the  6th  of  May,  1811.  The  mooted  question  of 
antique  statues  again  came  up,  a number  of  direct- 
ors of  the  Academy  being  anxious  that  they  should 
constitute  a part  of  the  Annual  Exhibition,  and 
wished  to  appropriate  one  day  in  the  week  for 
the  exclusive  admission  of  ladies.  To  this  the 
committee  of  arrangement  objected  on  the  grounds 
rather  well  taken,  “ that  there  never  ought  to  be 
any  public  exhibitions  where  both  sexes  cannot 
with  propriety  be  admitted  together  ; and  that  the 
works  of  living  artists  were  more  immediately  in- 
teresting, and  much  better  understood  by  the  public 
in  general  and  also  that  the  Society  of  Artists  was 
extremely  desirous  of  rendering  their  exhibition  a 
- place  of  fashionable  resort.” 

The  committee  of  artists  won  out  and  the  first 


32  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


exhibition  consisted  of  about  five  hundred  works, 
of  which  more  than  one  half  were  by  American 
artists.  After  the  exhibition  had  been  open  a few 
days,  the  old  record  goes  on  to  say  that  “ the  com- 
mittee of  arrangement  found  it  expedient  to  re- 
move the  antique  statues  altogether  from  the 
public  view.  The  vast  concourse  of  fashionable 
visitors  who  frequented  the  exhibition  after  the 
above  regulation  were  equally  surprised  and  de- 
lighted not  only  with  the  number  and  excellence 
of  the  various  productions,  but  also  with  the  taste 
and  manner  with  which  the  whole  was  arranged.” 
The  receipts  of  the  exhibition  during  the  stated 
period  of  six  weeks,  amounted  to  $1,860. 

A pleasant  feature  of  the  affair  was  a decision 
of  the  management  by  which  the  exhibition  was 
continued  one  week  beyond  the  limited  ‘time  for 
the  purpose  of  contributing  towards  the  relief  of 
the  unfortunate  sufferers  by  the  fire  in  the  town 
of  Newburyport,  Massachusetts.  The  receipts  of 
that  week  amounted  to  $410. 

The  second  exhibition  (1812)  appears  to  have 
been  particularly  remarkable  in  American  work. 
From  it  the  Academy  preserves  at  least  two  im- 
portant exhibits  in  its  permanent  collection.  Bass 
Otis,  who  had  been  apprenticed  to  a scythe-maker 
prior  to  his  entrance  into  the  field  of  art,  showed 
the  interior  of  his  late  master’s  smithy,  with  its 


Earlg  Exhibitions 


33 


flaming  forges  and  mysterious  depths  of  shadow. 
This  work  Otis  presented  to  the  Academy,  where 
it  is  valued  as  his  only  known  composition,  all  the 
rest  of  his  work  having  been  in  the  direction  of 
portraits. 

The  second  picture  referred  to  is  a “ View  of 
Centre  Square,  on  the  4th  of  July,”  by  John  Lewis 
Krimmell  (1787-1821),  a young  German  painter 
from  Edingen,  Wiirtemberg,  who  came  to  this 
country  in  1810  and  began  painting  small  cabinet 
portraits  in  oil.  There  was  too  much  in  him  to 
remain  satisfied  with  work  of  this  character  and 
he  tried  humourous  street  scenes,  exhibiting  in  the 
Academy  in  18 11  four  pictures,  including  the 
“ Pepper  Pot  Woman,”  which  won  for  him  imme- 
diate recognition.  His  keen  eye  was  fresh  for 
American  character,  and  this  picture  was  essen- 
tially typical  in  subject  of  Philadelphia,  whose 
citizens  were  all  too  familiar  with  the  sale  of  this 
lacerating  draught  of  spices  imported  from  the 
West  Indian  cuisine  to  notice  its  oddness  until  a 
foreigner  with  a sense  of  humour  pointed  it  out 
to  them. 

The  heroine  of  the  picture  figures  again  in  Krim- 
mell’s  little  chef  d’oeuvre,  the  picture  owned  by  the 
Academy,  shown  in  1812.  It  represents  the  water- 
works and  garden  at  Penn  Square.  Seldom  had 
the  spirit  of  a time  been  more  pointedly  set  down. 


34  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  ot  Jrne  Brts 


The  mcroyables  of  1812  are  ogling  the  silken 
belles,  who  mingle  with  the  crowd  of  idlers  that 
throng  the  fashionable  rendezvous  for  young  men 
and  maidens  of  a century  ago  — a place  long  since 
destroyed  by  the  uncompromising  hand  of  prog- 
ress. 

In  the  centre  is  seen  Rush’s  statue  of  “ Leda  and 
the  Swan,”  for  which  the  model  had  been  the 
famous  beauty  and  toast,  Miss  Vanuxen.  The 
original  statue  was  in  wood,  which  having  suf- 
fered almost  to  the  point  of  disintegration  from 
exposure  to  the  weather  was  cast  in  bronze,  and 
may  still  be  seen  in  Fairmount  Park. 

A family  of  Friends  are  pacing  the  half  for- 
bidden paradise  consecrated  to  art  and  frivolity: 
the  little  boy  stares  open-mouthed  at  the  nymph’s 
pearly  limbs,  and  is  rebuked  by  his  stern  father, 
while  his  mother,  profiting  by  the  momentary  dis- 
traction of  her  lord,  turns  her  poke  bonnet  to  take 
an  oblique  view  of  the  figure’s  soft  contour. 

This  historic  relic  is  retained  by  the  institution. 
Shortly  after  his  early  success,  the  young  satirist 
and  character  painter  was  drowned  while  swim- 
ming in  the  Wissahickon. 

Krimmell’s  most  important  work,  and  his  last 
before  his  untimely  end,  was  “ Election  Day  at  the 
State  House,  Philadelphia,”  in  which  a number  of 
minute  portraits  were  likenesses  of  prominent  citi- 


VIEW  OF  CENTRAL  SQUARE,  ON  THE  4TH  OF  JULY. 
By  John  Lewis  Krimmell. 


j£ari£  Exhibitions 


35 


zens  and  politicians.  The  present  whereabouts  of 
this  picture  is  unknown,  but  the  Historical  Soci- 
ety of  Pennsylvania  possesses  what  is  doubtless  the 
original  sketch,  showing  some  variations  from  the 
finished  work,  in  water-colour,  signed  and  dated 
1818.  Alexander  Lawson  began  to  engrave  this 
picture  the  size  of  the  original,  but  never  finished 
it,  and  the  plate  as  the  engraver  left  it  was  some 
years  ago  presented  to  the  Academy  by  Lawson’s 
daughter.  The  Academy  owns  also  “ Bishop 
White  Officiating  at  a Country  Wedding,”  painted 
by  Krimmell. 


CHAPTER  III 


BENJAMIN  WEST  AND  WASHINGTON  ALLSTON 

Historically,  a first  place  in  the  annals  of  The 
Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts  should  be 
accorded  to  the  works  of  Benjamin  West  (1738- 
1820),  of  which  the  Academy  owns  three  impor- 
tant examples.  These  include  his  best  known 
work,  “ Death  on  a Pale  Horse,”  “ Paul  and  Bar- 
nabas,” and  “ Christ  Rejected,”  his  acknowledged 
masterpiece. 

At  the  sale  of  his  pictures  after  West’s  death 
the  latter  brought  three  thousand  guineas.  It  was 
exhibited  at  the  Academy  in  1843  and  was  pre- 
sented to  the  institution  in  1878  by  Mrs.  Joseph 
Harrison.  The  picture  has  been  engraved  by  John 
Sartain. 

West  enjoyed  a long  life  and  occupied  an  unique 
position  in  the  history  of  American  art.  He  was 
the  one  true  Philadelphian  of  the  early  painters 
who  plied  their  art  in  the  Quaker  city,  and  though 
his  style  of  painting,  developed  under  the  patron- 
age of  George  III,  was  not  of  a character  to  hold 
the  public  approval  — to  which,  by  reason  of  its 


Benjamin  West  ant>  Washington  Hllston  37 


cumbrous  proportions  and  unrelated  subject,  it 
made  little  appeal  — yet  historically  West’s  place 
in  Pennsylvania  is  such  that  one  can  but  accord 
him  the  dignity  and  notice  which  his  industry 
deserves. 

Benjamin  West  was  born  in  what  is  now  prac- 
tically Swarthmore,  Pennsylvania,  on  October  io, 
1738,  and  died  in  London  March  n,  1820.  The 
story  of  his  early  efforts  at  art  — the  pen  and  ink 
sketch  of  his  sister,  sleeping  in  her  cradle,  made 
at  the  age  of  seven  — the  paint  brushes  made  from 
the  hair  of  a pet  cat’s  tail  — the  red  and  yellow 
earths  given  him  by  friendly  Indians,  for  his 
first  attempts  in  colour,  and  the  filching  of  his 
mother’s  indigo  pot  to  complete  his  outfit  of  pri- 
mary colours  are  too  well  known  to  dilate  upon 
and  give  a colour  of  romance  to  what  was  probably 
a prosaic  enough  reality.  Such  stories  make  their 
own  appeal  — deeds  signed  in  blood  have  a dark 
significance  — and  as  we  like  to  think  of  Giotto, 
sketching  his  sheep  upon  the  sands  of  the  Italian 
hills,  so  the  aspect  of  little  Benjamin  West’s  child- 
ish fingers  fashioning  his  brushes  out  of  his  in- 
sistent need  for  expression  gives  a distinct  thrill, 
and  there  appears  even  a certain  nobility  in  the  cat 
who  shed  her  coat,  at  one  knows  not  what  agony, 
that  American  art  might  have  its  beginnings. 

Of  the  friend  who  gave  the  lad  a box  of  paints 


38  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


and  several  engravings  to  stimulate  his  ambition, 
one  does  not  hear  so  much,  while  the  name  of 
William  Williams,  an  Englishman  painting  in 
Philadelphia,  who  is  said  to  have  given  him  his 
first  lessons  in  art,  but  for  West’s  mention  of  him, 
has  passed  into  oblivion. 

West  made  his  first  attempts  at  portraiture  in 
Lancaster,  which  circumstance  had  a marked  influ- 
ence in  the  formation  of  his  career.  There  he  met 
William  Henry,  an  inventor,  who,  in  his  youth, 
manufactured  firearms  in  that  town.  Henry  is 
described  as  an  extraordinary  man,  possessing  the 
power  to  interest  the  imagination  of  those  with 
whom  he  worked.  On  examining  West’s  produc- 
tions he  is  reported  to  have  said  that  if  he  had 
such  talent  he  would  waste  no  time  painting  por- 
traits, but  would  devote  himself  to  historical  paint- 
ing. He  suggested  to  West  “ The  Death  of  Soc- 
rates ” as  a subject  worthy  of  attention,  and  we 
find  the  painter  at  the  tender  age  of  perhaps  four- 
teen executing  the  subject  in  accordance  with 
Henry’s  idea.  He  made  at  this  time,  or,  at  any 
rate,  before  his  departure  for  Europe,  portraits  of 
Mr.  and  Mrs.  Henry,  which  are  now  in  the  posses: 
sion  of  the  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania. 

At  this  time  — in  the  year  1754  — before  West 
reached  his  sixteenth  year  — he  met  William 
Smith,  provost  of  the  College  of  Philadelphia,  who 


benjamin  West  anb  Washington  Bllston  39 


took  him  in  hand  to  educate  him  in  classical  lit- 
erature according  to  his  supposed  needs  as  a 
painter.  Smith  brought  the  lad  to  Philadelphia  in 
the  interest  of  his  education,  and  in  1756  he  estab- 
lished himself  there  as  a portrait  painter.  A sou- 
venir of  this  time  and  of  his  acquaintance  with  the 
provost  of  the  University  is  preserved  by  the  His- 
torical Society  in  the  interesting  portrait  of  Will- 
iam Smith  as  Saint  Ignatius. 

During  his  sojourn  in  Philadelphia  West  re- 
sided with  his  brother-in-law,  Mr.  Clarkson,  and 
through  his  kind  and  influential  patron  became  the 
associate  of  Francis  Hopkinson,  Thomas  Godfrey, 
Jacob  Duche  and  Joseph  Reid,  then,  like  himself, 
unknown  to  fame. 

By  the  year  1756  he  had  full  employment  as  a 
portrait  painter,  and  his  price  for  a picture  was 
two  guineas  and  a half  for  a head  and  five  for  a 
half-length.  In  addition  to  the  canvases  already 
mentioned  the  Historical  Society  preserves  his 
masterpiece  of  this  early  time  in  the  excellent  por- 
trait of  Mrs.  Thomas  Hopkinson. 

He  visited  New  York,  with  a view  to  increasing 
his  prices  and  thus  hasten  his  contemplated  depar- 
ture for  Italy,  and  there  painted  many  portraits 
of  which  there  is  but  scant  record. 

At  the  age  of  twenty-one  Benjamin  West,  ac- 
companied by  a son  of  his  patron,  Chief  Justice 


40  pennsglpanta  Hcafcentg  of  ffine  Brts 


Allen,  embarked  for  his  European  tour.  Every 
circumstance  was  in  his  favour  and  he  had  all 
along  the  line  the  best  of  introductions.  If  Henry 
and  Smith  gave  West  his  first  bent  toward  the 
classic  and  historical  subject,  his  art  received  its 
final  stamp  of  pomposity  in  Italy,  where  he  became 
imbued  with  the  spirit  of  the  classic  revival  then 
in  vogue  and  for  which  his  peculiar  training  at 
home  had  specially  fitted  him.  His  paintings  were 
“ Cimon  and  Iphigenia  ” and  “ Angelica  and  Me- 
dora.” 

After  three  years’  residence  in  Italy  West  went 
to  London,  where  he  took  a studio  and  commenced 
the  serious  business  of  life.  Here  again  circum- 
stances combined  for  his  advantage.  “ His  friends 
Allen,  Hamilton  and  Smith  had  arrived  before  him 
in  London  and  received  him  with  joy  and  tri- 
umph.” The  portrait  of  Governor  Hamilton, 
painted  at  this  time,  hangs  in  Independence  Hall. 
Through  his  friends  he  obtained  at  once  the  right 
introductions  and  lost  no  time  in  establishing  him- 
self as  a historical  painter,  of  which  England  at 
the  time  had  none  of  importance,  and  his  work 
soon  attracted  attention. 

He  arrived  quickly  at  the  patronage  of  the 
church  and  painted  for  Dr.  Newton  “ The  Parting 
of  Hector  and  Andromache,”  and  for  the  Bishop 
of  Worcester,  “ The  Return  of  the  Prodigal  Son.” 


Benjamin  TPQdest  ant>  Masbtngton  Hllston  41 


About  this  time  he  married,  September  2,  1764, 
Elizabeth  Shewed,  the  young  lady  to  whom  he  had 
become  engaged  before  leaving  his  native  land  and 
who  was  escorted  to  London  for  the  wedding  in 
the  convoy  of  West’s  father. 

The  painter’s  introduction  to  George  III  was  the 
outcome  of  a commission  executed  for  Dr.  Drum- 
mond, the  Archbishop  of  York,  for  whom  West 
painted  a picture  of  “ Agrippina  Landing  with  the 
Ashes  of  Germanicus.”  The  picture  was  brought 
before  the  attention  of  the  throne,  and  from  that 
time  until  the  mental  illness  of  George  III  became 
manifest,  he  enjoyed  the  full  confidence  and  pat- 
ronage of  the  royal  family,  which  culminated  in 
a contemplated  series  of  pictures  on  the  progress 
of  revealed  religion,  for  his  Majesty’s  Chapel  at 
Windsor.  The  pictures  were  all  sketched  and 
twenty-eight  were  executed,  for  which  West  re- 
ceived in  all  twenty-one  thousand  seven  hundred 
and  five  pounds. 

In  London  West  became  at  once  a personality. 
He  was  one  of  the  founders  of  the  Royal  Acad- 
emy, and  in  1792  succeeded  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds 
as  president  of  that  institution,  a post  which  he  held 
until  1815. 

As  a man  he  was  benevolent  and  kind  as  well 
as  of  a liberality  in  imparting  his  knowledge  to 
others.  The  youth  in  his  own  country  looked  up 


42  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  ot  jfine  Brts 

to  and  revered  him  as  the  epitome  of  professional 
achievement  and  mundane  success.  In  the  biog- 
raphies of  contemporary  American  painters  one 
reads  constantly  of  their  desire  to  get  to  London 
and  to  study  with  West.  They  were  apparently 
always  cordially  received,  and  West  probably  en- 
joyed his  position  of  influence  and  patronage  in  a 
foreign  land. 

Charles  Willson  Peale,  Gilbert  Stuart,  Joseph 
Wright,  Matthew  Pratt  and  John  Trumbull  each 
sought  him  out  and  became  in  a sense  his  pupils. 
“ The  Life  and  Works  of  Gilbert  Stuart,”  by 
Mason,  tells  a story  of  the  young  painter’s  intro- 
duction to  West,  which  expresses  the  relationship 
of  our  younger  painters  toward  the  pioneer  and 
also  quite  clearly  his  attitude  in  the  matter.  Stuart, 
driven  by  necessity  in  London  to  some  radical 
measure  to  affect  a change  in  his  prospects,  called 
upon  West  without  an  introduction.  West  was 
dining  with  some  friends  when  a servant  told  him 
that  some  one  wished  to  see  him.  He  made  an- 
swer, “ I am  engaged,”  but  added  after  a pause, 
“ Who  is  he?”  “I  don’t  know,  sir:  he  says  he 
is  from  America.”  Thereupon  one  of  the  guests, 
Mr.  Wharton  of  Philadelphia,  an  intimate  friend 
of  West’s  family,  offered  to  go  and  see  who  it  was. 
He  found  a handsome  youth  dressed  in  a fashion- 
able green  coat,  and  after  talking  to  him  for  some 


Benjamin  West  an&  Washington  BUston  43 


time  found  that  he  was  a nephew  of  Joseph  An- 
thony, one  of  the  most  prominent  merchants  of 
Philadelphia,  and  a friend  of  Mr.  Wharton.  Hear- 
ing that  he  was  well  connected  West  came  out 
and  received  the  visitor  cordially.  Stuart  told  him 
of  his  long  deferred  desire  to  see  him  and  his  wish 
to  make  further  progress  in  his  calling,  to  all  of 
which  West  listened  with  kindness  and  attention. 
At  parting  he  requested  Stuart  to  bring  him  a 
specimen  of  his  work,  which  Stuart  gladly  did, 
with  the  result  that  in  a few  days  he  commenced 
his  studies  with  West,  and  in  the  summer  of  1777 
he  was  domiciled  in  the  family.  At  this  time 
Stuart  was  twenty-two  years  of  age  and  West 
thirty-nine. 

West  as  a matter  of  fact  struck  little  root  into 
English  art.  The  course  of  its  development  pushed 
straight  across  from  Hogarth  to  Wilkie,  produ- 
cing an  occasional  tangent,  — a Reynolds  — a 
Turner  — a West,  — and  these  so  disconnected, 
so  beside  the  vein,  that  they  appear  quite  apart  from 
the  normal  course  of  development. 

For  West  there  is  perhaps  more  reason  than  for 
the  others.  His  early  visit  to  Italy  gave  him  his 
bent  for  ever,  as  it  affected  Greenough,  our  early 
American  sculptor,  and  all  the  men  who  came 
under  the  spell  of  the  Classic  Revival.  It  stultified 
their  imaginations,  it  warped  their  view  of  nature, 


44  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Hrts 


and  we  find  it  reflected  in  nearly  all  the  work  of 
this  arid  period.  It  was  an  epoch  which  left  no 
great  names  in  any  country  — only  slavish  follow- 
ers of  a cult  who  worshipped  cold  formality,  con- 
scious composition,  theoretical  knowledge  of  art 
inspired  by  the  newly  exhumed  and  ill-digested 
antiques,  whose  meaning  in  their  relation  to  an- 
cient times  they  failed  to  grasp. 

But  we  must  weigh  the  man  by  his  century,  and 
in  his,  West’s  place  was  well  assured.  Over  in 
France  David  was  elevating  humanity  with  all  his 
might  on  the  same  stilts.  We  shall  do  well  to  pay 
West  homage  for  the  good  that  was  in  him,  rather 
than  to  insist  upon  obvious  lapses  where  he  failed 
to  see  beyond  the  impediments  of  his  age.  His 
career  of  huge  futilities  is  not  without  some  saving 
grace  of  solid  ground  gained,  where  a bit  of  novel 
courage  stands  bright  and  wholesome  to  mark  the 
progress  of  expression  toward  truth  and  nature. 

In  his  painting,  “ The  Death  of  Wolfe,”  West 
had  the  courage  to  break  away  from  the  traditions 
of  the  classic  school.  He  painted  the  characters  in 
true  British  uniforms,  though  Reynolds  came  to 
persuade  him  to  change  the  costumes  for  the  an- 
tique garments  and  nudes.  West  resisted  and 
achieved  a little  masterpiece.  After  it  was  finished 
Reynolds  not  only  retracted  his  objections  but 
prophesied  that  the  work  would  occasion  a revolu- 


Benjamin  Udest  anb  HBlasbtnGton  B listen  45 

tion  in  art.  It  was  purchased  by  Lord  Gros- 
venor. 

We  have  but  to  study  the  age  — that  dreadful 
age  which  began  with  George  Ill’s  remarks  to 
Fanny  Burney  upon  Shakespeare,  and  degenerated 
into  the  debaucheries  of  the  Prince  Regent  — to 
crown  West  with  an  apology  that  is  almost  an 
ovation. 

Thackeray  has  a word  to  say  for  West  sug- 
gested by  a stroll  through  this  Academy.  It  oc- 
curs in  the  “ Small  Beer  Chronicles : Roundabout 
Papers.”  “ ‘ I was  walking  with  Mr.  Fox  in  the 
Louvre/  says  Benjamin  West,  ‘ and  I remarked 
how  many  people  turned  around  to  look  at  me. 
This  shows  the  respect  of  the  French  for  the  fine 
arts.’  This  is  a curious  instance  of  a very  small 
claret  indeed  which  imagined  itself  to  be  port  of 
the  strongest  body.  There  are  not  many  examples 
of  a faith  so  deep,  so  simple,  so  satisfactory  as  this. 
I have  met  with  many  who  would  like  to  be  port, 
and  thought  Reynolds’  overrated  stuff.  When  I 
saw  West’s  pictures  at  Philadelphia  I looked  at 
them  with  astonishment  and  awe.  Hide,  blushing 
glory!  hide  your  head  under  your  old  nightcap. 
O Immortality!  is  this  to  be  the  end  of  you?  ” 

When  West  lost  the  patronage  of  the  court  of 
Great  Britain,  in  1802,  through  the  illness  of 
George  III,  although  sixty-four  years  of  age,  he 


46  ©ennsElioania  Bcafcems  of  Jfine  Brts 


commenced  a series  of  religious  pictures  on  a larger 
scale  than  any  he  had  painted  for  the  king.  The 
first  of  these  was  “ Christ  Healing  -the  Sick  in  the 
Temple,”  now  in  the  National  Gallery,  London. 
This  picture  was  painted  for  the  Pennsylvania 
Hospital,  of  Philadelphia,  but  West,  having  sold 
it  to  the  British  institution,  painted  a replica,  which 
is  still  in  the  possession  of  the  hospital.  This  pic- 
ture was  followed  by  two  much  larger  ones, 
“ Christ  Rejected,”  and  “ Death  on  a Pale  Horse,” 
both  of  which  are  now  owned  by  the  Academy. 

“ Christ  Rejected  ” has  been  by  general  consent 
pronounced  the  finest  production  of  his  genius,  and 
its  excellence  is  the  more  remarkable  as  the  artist 
had  nearly  attained  the  venerable  age  of  eighty 
when  he  undertook  the  herculean  task  of  covering 
this  enormous  canvas.  The  Reverend  Sydney 
Smith  said,  on  looking  at  it,  “ I can  preach  you 
no  better  sermon  than  this  picture.” 

The  picture  represents  the  events  which  took 
place  when  Pilate  brought  forth  Jesus,  crowned 
with  thorns,  and  yielded  him  up  to  the  judgment 
of  the  multitude.  The  central  point  of  interest, 
the  figure  of  the  Saviour,  is  presented  with  bound 
hands  loosely  holding  the  derisive  semblance  of 
a sceptre,  the  serene  brows  bleed  under  the  crown 
of  thorns,  while  the  patient  shoulders  are  receiving 
the  added  mockery  of  a regal  mantle.  Standing 


CHRIST  REJECTED. 
By  Benjamin  West 


Benjamin  West  anfc>  Washington  BUston  47 


in  front  of  Christ,  with  hand  outstretched  toward 
him,  Pontius  Pilate  appeals  to  the  people  whether 
they  will  not  select  him  as  the  criminal,  to  whose 
liberation  they  have  a right  at  that  feast,  but  their 
eager  faces  and  uplifted  hands  reject  Christ,  and 
demand  Barabbas,  who,  bared  to  the  waist,  with 
hands  bound  behind  him,  stands  at  the  opposite 
side  of  the  picture,  near  the  prison  portal,  looking 
out  sullenly  from  beneath  his  villainous  brows. 
Prominent  in  the  centre  of  the  picture  stands  the 
richly  apparelled  high  priest,  Caiaphas,  who,  with 
extended  arms  suiting  the  action  to  the  words, 
leads  the  cry  of  “ Crucify  him ! Crucify  him ! ” 

There  are  introduced  into  the  picture  the  inci- 
dents which  the  story  demands,  such  as  the  sorrow 
of  Peter;  the  attachment  of  Joseph  of  Arimathea; 
the  superstitious  grief  of  Pilate’s  wife;  the  despair 
of  Mary  Magdalen;  John,  the  beloved  disciple, 
supporting  the  fainting  form  of  Mary,  the  mother, 
etc.,  so  that  the  spectator  has  before  him  every 
object  necessary  to  the  explanation  and  unity  of 
the  story. 

On  the  left  of  the  spectator  are  the  Roman  sol- 
diers attendant  upon  Pilate,  who  have  Jesus  in 
their  custody.  They  bear  the  standard  of  the 
Emperor  Tiberius,  which  marks  the  period  of  the 
occurrence.  Their  commander,  the  Centurion, 
stands  in  martial  attitude,  sedately  considering  the 


48  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  ffine  Brts 


awful  event,  surrounded  by  his  family.  Next  to 
these  is  the  main  group,  consisting  of  the  Saviour, 
Pilate  and  the  High  Priest. 

Behind  the  High  Priest  is  a throng  of  persons 
— some  deliberating  on  this  extraordinary  event, 
while  many  outrageously  denounce  the  hated  ob- 
ject of  their  wrath  and  insult  him  with  opprobrious 
looks,  gestures  and  language.  In  the  front  of  these 
are  Joseph  of  Arimathea,  James  the  Less  and 
Saint  Peter,  who,  filled  with  remorse  at  his  former 
conduct  in  having  denied  his  Saviour,  “ went  out 
and  wept  bitterly.”  This  central  line  of  figures  is 
terminated  on  the  right  by  the  murderer  Barabbas, 
and  the  two  thieves  who  have  just  been  brought 
from  their  confinement  and  are  attended  by  offi- 
cers, who  are  delivering  them  into  the  custody  of 
others. 

In  the  middle  of  the  foreground  is  the  converted 
Mary  Magdalen,  who,  in  the  bitterness  of  her  grief, 
falls  upon  the  cross  and  gazes  at  her  Lord  in  a 
burst  of  despair.  Near  to  Mary  Magdalen  is  the 
third  Mary,  whose  hands  are  compressed  in  sudden 
emotion.  All  the  others  are  the  pious  women  from 
Galilee,  who  came  to  administer  to  Christ,  to  whom 
he  said  as  he  saw  them  weeping,  “ Weep  not  for 
me,  ye  daughters  of  Israel.” 

The  gallery  in  front  of  the  arches  in  the  back- 
ground is  filled  with  spectators  agitated  by  con- 


Benjamin  Mest  anb  Washington  Hllston  49 


flicting  emotions.  In  the  centre  is  Herod  with  his 
men  of  war  and  his  court.  The  wife  of  Pilate, 
who  accompanied  him,  marks  the  reconciliation  of 
the  two  chiefs.  She  is  earnestly  looking  at  the 
“ just  person  ” and  thinking  of  her  dream. 

The  preparations  for  the  scourging  and  crucify- 
ing of  Christ  are  denoted  by  the  brutal  characters 
who  are  removing  the  robe  from  his  shoulders,  and 
by  the  indecent  and  malignant  zeal  of  the  man  who 
appears  eager  to  inflict  the  scourge. 

“ Death  on  a Pale  Horse  ” enjoyed  perhaps  an 
even  greater  vogue.  It  is  signed  on  the  front 
“ Benj.  West,  Octr.  io,  1817.”  Washington  All- 
ston  writes  of  it : “ No  fancy  could  have  better 
conceived  and  no  pencil  more  happily  embodied  the 
visions  of  sublimity  than  has  his  in  his  inimitable 
picture  from  the  Revelation.  Its  subject  is  the 
opening  of  the  seven  seals,  and  a more  sublime  and 
awful  picture  I never  beheld.” 

The  enormous  canvas  is  twenty-five  feet  by  four- 
teen feet,  six  inches.  Death  on  the  Pale  Horse  is 
represented  destroying  Man  and  all  living  things, 
in  every  direction.  The  Powers  of  Hell  follow  on 
the  clouds  behind  him.  An  image  of  the  devour- 
ing mortality  is  seen  in  the  sudden  death  of  a young 
mother  and  her  infant  son.  She  is  supported  by 
her  husband,  who,  at  the  same  time,  extends  his 
arms  as  it  were  to  stop  the  gallop  of  the  Pale 


50  Pennsylvania  Hca^emp  of  fine  Uxts 


Horse.  Her  daughter,  a beautiful  child,  in  a pa- 
thetic attitude,  endeavours  to  succour  her.  Every- 
thing shows  this  to  be  a family  of  rank. 

The  destruction  by  wild  beasts  is  represented  by 
a lion  and  lioness  rushing  upon  a tumultuous  group 
of  men  on  horseback  and  on  foot,  who  are  endeav- 
ouring, in  turn,  to  destroy  their  assailants.  A wild 
bull  is  seen  attacking  the  crowd  behind,  and  toss- 
ing a youth  into  the  air.  . The  furious  animal  is 
himself  assailed  by  dogs.  In  the  clouds  an  eagle 
and  a heron  are  engaged  in  mortal  combat;  and 
in  the  foreground  is  a dove  lamenting  over  its  dead 
mate. 

Near  the  bull,  but  somewhat  further  in  die  pic- 
ture, a young  man  is  struck  dead  by  lightning  on 
the  supposed  day  of  his  marriage:  his  brother  is 
supporting  his  lifeless  body,  and  a young  girl,  his 
intended  bride,  gazes  wildly  at  him.  A number  of 
figures  are  seen  in  confusion,  terror  and  astonish- 
ment, at  this  awful  visitation.  Over  their  heads 
the  firmament  is  rent;  the  clouds  are  broken;  the 
thunders  and  lightnings  let  loose  and  the  heavens 
rolled  together  “ as  a scroll.” 

The  destruction  by  famine  is  represented  by  a 
sallow,  emaciated  man,  with  a wrinkled  visage  and 
hollow  eyes,  on  his  knees,  endeavouring  to  dig  up 
some  wfild  roots  with  his  long  nails,  to  appease  the 
ravenous  cravings  of  nature.  His  empty  cup  lies 


JSenjamin  Meat  a n£>  Washington  Bliston  51 


beside  him.  Close  to  this  the  destruction  by  pesti- 
lence is  figured  by  a woman  with  an  expression  of 
pain  and  malady  upon  her  wan  countenance  and 
expressed  in  her  crouching  attitude. 

The  destruction  by  war  is  represented  by  a fig- 
ure, in  helmet  and  armour,  mounted  on  a red  horse, 
with  his  sword  raised  in  the  act  of  charging;  the 
clouds  of  battle  rise  before  him.  Near  this  scourge 
of  the  human  race,  a man  mounted  on  a black 
horse,  with  the  balances,  is  seen,  while  Christ, 
crowned,  with  a bow  in  one  hand  and  a quiver 
at  his  shoulder,  is  mounted  on  a white  horse  and 
goes  forth  “ conquering  and  to  conquer.”  On  the 
foreground  beneath,  the  serpent  lies  with  his  head 
bruised,  in  fulfilment  of  the  sacred  word.  The 
eyes  of  the  Redeemer  are  fixed  on  the  souls  of  the 
martyrs,  who  are  ascending  in  glory  to  Heaven. 
This  mysterious  representation,  which  forms  so 
beautiful  a part  of  the  picture,  is  introduced  here 
as  another  emblem  of  the  final  accomplishment  of 
the  Christian  dispensation  at  the  last  day. 

In  the  background,  on  this  side  of  the  picture, 
a Roman  army  appears  on  its  march  loaded  with 
spoils  of  the  Temple  of  Jerusalem,  and  driving 
along  the  Hebrew  captives.  On  the  still  more 
remote  seacoast,  a Christian  fleet  is  seen,  and  the 
landing  of  the  Crusaders  to  recapture  the  Holy 
City. 


52  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  ot  fftne  Brts 


The  general  effect  aimed  at  by  the  artist  in  this 
picture  is  the  terribly  sublime  and  its  various  modi- 
fications until  lost  in  the  opposite  extremes  of  pity 
and  horror.  Mr.  West  was  of  the  opinion,  that, 
to  delineate  a physical  form,  which  in  its  moral 
impression  would  approximate  to  that  of  the  vis- 
ionary Death  of  Milton,  it  was  necessary  to  endow 
it  with  the  appearance  of  superhuman  strength  and 
energy.  He  has  therefore  exerted  the  utmost  force 
‘ and  perspicuity  of  his  pencil  on  the  central  fig- 
ure. 

He  has  depicted  the  King  of  Terrors  with  the 
physiognomy  of  the  dead  in  a charnel  house,  but 
animated  almost  to  ignition  with  inextinguishable 
rage,  placed  on  his  head  a kingly  crown,  and 
clothed  the  length  of  his  limbs  with  a robe  of  fune- 
real black.  His  uplifted  hand  holds  no  sceptre, 
but  is  entwined  with  the  serpent,  who  first  brought 
death  into  the  world,  and  he  launches  his  darts 
from  both  hands  in  all  directions  with  a merci- 
less impartiality.  His  horse  rushes  forward 
with  the  universal  wildness  of  a tempestuous 
element,  breathing  livid  pestilence,  and  rearing 
and  trampling  with  the  vehemence  of  unbridled 
fury. 

Behind  him  are  seen  an  insidious  demon  bearing 
the  torch  of  discord,  with  a monstrous  progeny  of 
the  reptile  world  — 


JBenjamin  Tffilest  anb  Masbington  Bllston  53 

“ All  prodigious  things, 

Abominable,  unutterable,  and  worse 

Than  fables  yet  half  feign’d  of  fear  conceiv’d, 

Gorgons  and  hydras,  and  chimeras  dire.” 

The  Ministers  of  Hell,  who  had  “ power  given  to 
them  over  the  fourth  part  of  the  earth,  to  kill  with 
the  sword  and  with  hunger  and  with  disease  and 
with  the  beasts  of  the  earth.” 

The  next  character  on  the  canvas  in  point  of 
consequence  is  the  Rider  on  the  White  Horse.  As 
he  is  supposed  to  represent  the  Gospel,  it  was  req- 
uisite that  he  should  be  invested  with  those  exte- 
rior indications  of  purity,  excellence  and  dignity 
which  are  associated  in  our  minds  with  the  name 
and  office  of  the  Messiah.  He  is  painted  with  a 
solemn  countenance,  expressive  of  a mind  filled 
with  the  thoughts  of  a great  enterprise,  and  he 
advances  with  that  serene  majesty  in  which  Divine 
Providence  continues,  through  the  storms  and  com- 
motions of  the  temporal  world,  to  execute  its  eter- 
nal purposes.  He  is  armed  with  a bow  and  arrows, 
the  force  and  arguments  of  truth,  and  leaves  behind 
him,  as  passing  vapour,  all  those  terrible  tumults 
and  phantoms  which  make  up  the  auxiliaries  and 
retinue  of  Death.  At  the  first  view  he  seems  to 
be  only  a secondary  character,  but  on  considering 
the  business  of  the  scene,  it  will  be  obvious  that 
he  is  the  great  leader  and  that  the  others  but  follow 


54  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  of  ffine  Brts 


in  his  train,  and  carry  into  effect  the  inferior  ob- 
jects of  his  heavenly  mission,  as  he  goes  towards 
that  glorious  region  in  which  appear  “ the  souls 
of  them  that  were  slain  for  the  word  of  God,  and 
for  the  testimony  which  they  held.” 

The  third  of  the  apocalyptic  characters  is  the 
Rider  on  the  Red  Horse.  He  is  represented  sim- 
ply as  a warrior  armed  with  the  great  sword.  He 
advances  in  the  same  direction  as  the  Messiah, 
thereby  intimating  that  those  wars  which  have 
accompanied  the  Christian  religion,  and  of  which 
he  is  the  type  and  emblem,  are  a part  of  the  divine 
scheme  for  effectually  diffusing  it  throughout  the 
entire  world.  It  will  be  observed  that  the  horse 
in  this  instance  is  caparisoned  as  a war  horse,  while 
those  of  Death  and  the  Messiah  are  without  reins, 
being  guided  only  by  the  will  of  their  riders.  The 
prophetic  vista  beyond  this  character  shows  in  one 
division  the  Romans  under  Titus  returning  with 
the  spoils  of  Jerusalem  and  in  the  other  the  Cru- 
saders contending  with  the  Saracens. 

Behind  the  Messiah  and  the  Warrior,  the  Rider 
on  the  Black  Horse  is  seen  coming  forward.  He 
is  represented  with  the  steady  countenance  of  a 
man  scrupulous  in  his  estimate  of  things,  stern  in 
his  decisions,  and  likely  to  require  the  execution 
of  his  adjudications  with  the  unrelenting  solemnity 
of  a terrible  judge.  He  follows  the  two  preceding 


Benjamin  West  anb  Washington  Hllston  55 


characters  and  is  supposed  to  typify  that  sceptical 
philosophy  which  affects  to  estimate  Christianity 
by  the  temporary  circumstances  that  have  arisen 
in  the  course  of  its  progress,  while  it  is  itself  but 
a part  of  the  great  cloud  of  mysteries  which  en- 
velop the  present  and  future  purposes  of  religion. 

To  give  an  idea  of  the  impression  created  by  the 
picture  upon  contemporary  writers,  we  quote  from 
“ The  History  of  the  Rise  and  Progress  of  the 
Arts  of  Design  in  America:”  — “He  (West) 
visited  Paris,  and  took  with  him  his  sublime  com- 
position on  a small  scale  of  * Death  on  a Pale 
Horse.’  His  reception  was  cordial  and  the  admira- 
tion of  his  work  enthusiastic.  Mr.  Cunningham 
says,  ‘ Minister  after  minister,  and  artist  after 
artist,  from  the  accomplished  Talleyrand  and  the 
subtle  Fouche,  to  the  enthusiastic  Denon  and  the 
ferocious  David,  gathered  around  him,  and  talked 
with  unbounded  love  of  historical  painting  and  of 
its  influence  on  mankind.’  ” The  Academy’s  can- 
vas Was  enlarged  and  altered  from  this  sketch 
which  West  carried  to  Paris  in  1802. 

This  work  was  executed  when  the  artist  was 
nearly  eighty  years  of  age.  Soon  after,  Cunning- 
ham tells  us,  “ he  began  to  sink  and  though  still 
to  be  found  at  his  easel  his  hand  had  lost  its  early 
alacrity.  It  was  evident  that  all  this  was  soon  to 
cease,  that  he  was  suffering  a slow,  and  a general 


56  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


and  easy  decay.  The  venerable  old  man  sat  in  his 
study  among  his  favourite  pictures,  a breathing 
image  of  piety  and  contentment,  awaiting  calmly 
the  hour  of  his  dissolution.  Without  any  fixed 
complaint,  his  mental  faculties  unimpaired,  his 
cheerfulness  uneclipsed  and  with  looks  serene  and 
benevolent,  he  expired  nth  March,  1820,  in  the 
eighty-second  year  of  his  age.” 

He  was  buried  beside  Reynolds,  Opie,  Barry  and 
Van  Dyck  in  St.  Paul’s  Cathedral.  The  pall  was 
borne  by  noblemen,  ambassadors  and  academicians; 
his  two  sons  and  his  grandson  were  chief  mourn- 
ers, and  sixty  coaches  brought  up  the  splendid 
procession. 

One  of  the  most  interesting  of  the  early  Amer- 
ican pictures  in  the  Academy’s  collection  is  Wash- 
ington Allston’s  (1779-1843)  painting  of  the 
“ Dead  Man  revived  by  touching  the  Relics  of 
Elisha,”  which  came  to  the  institution  by  purchase 
in  1816,  for  the  sum  of  three  thousand  five  hundred 
dollars. 

The  painter  was  born  at  Waccamaw,  South 
Carolina,  November  5,  1779,  and  died  in  Cam- 
bridge, Massachusetts,  July  9,  1843.  At  an  early 
age  he  was  sent  on  account  of  delicate  health  to 
Newport,  Rhode  Island,  where  he  remained  until 
he  entered  Harvard  University,  whence  he  was 


Benjamin  West  ant)  Washington  Hllston  57 


graduated  in  1800.  His  natural  taste  for  art  was 
fostered  by  the  congenial  atmosphere  of  his 
adopted  residence,  where  Smybert  had  painted  and 
Stuart  and  Malbone  had  been  born.  Allston’s  first 
instruction  in  art  was  during  his  school  days,  from 
Samuel  King,  of  Newport,  and  when  he  removed 
to  Boston  to  enter  college,  he  acquired  his  first 
knowledge  of  colour  in  the  human  figure  from  pic- 
tures by  Pine  in  the  Columbian  Museum.  At  this 
time  he  became  acquainted  with  Malbone,  and  the 
year  after  Allston  left  college  he  accompanied  Mal- 
bone to  England.  He  entered  the  Royal  Academy 
and  the  next  year  exhibited  a picture  at  Somerset 
House. 

He  travelled  through  France,  Switzerland  and 
Italy,  remaining  in  the  latter  country  four  years, 
when  he  returned  to  America  and  married  a sister 
of  the  celebrated  Dr.  Channing.  On  his  second 
trip  to  Europe  he  took  with  him  as  a pupil  Morse, 
the  future  inventor  of  the  telegraph. 

Allston’s  first  important  picture  after  arriving  in 
England  was  “ The  Dead  Man  Restored.”  It  was 
finished  and  exhibited  at  the  British  Institution  in 
1813,  where  it  received  the  first  prize  of  two  hun- 
dred guineas.  Horace  Binney,  one  of  the  founders 
of  the  Academy,  who  had  been  in  the  senior  class  at 
Cambridge  when  Allston  was  a freshman,  was  trav- 
elling in  England  at  the  time,  and  being  impressed 


58  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  ffine  Brts 


with  the  merit  of  the  painting  persuaded  Allston  to 
entrust  it  to  his  charge  to  convey  it  to  Philadelphia, 
feeling  sure  that  the  Academy  would  purchase  it. 

A contemporary  review  describes  it  as  “ one  of 
the  stateliest  pictures  of  the  American  School;  ” as 
“ an  awe  inspiring  work,  carrying  the  mind  back 
to  the  days  of  cave  burial  among  the  courageous 
Hebrew  invaders  of  Asia  Minor.  A cavern  is 
crowded  with  mourning  figures;  silhouettes  of  the 
sentinels,  who  watch  for  the  prowling  Moabites, 
darken  the  mouth ; in  the  foreground  crumble  the 
phosphoric  bones,  and  a nightmare  figure  in  a 
shroud  stretches  up  toward  the  light  and  air  with 
its  new  impulse  of  life.  Our  art  has  produced  no 
other  conception  so  simply  grand  and  so  nobly 
terrible.” 

There  is  much  that  is  fine  about  the  picture, 
which  was  extremely  popular  in  its  day  and  was 
the  subject  of  many  eulogies.  With  all  due  re- 
spect for  the  epoch  of  flowery  words  in  which  he 
lived,  one  may  say  that  Allston  showed  high  imag- 
inative powers  and  his  ability  as  a colourist  earned 
for  him  the  title  of  the  American  Titian. 

Allston  was  made  an  associate  of  the  Royal 
Academy,  but  could  not  be  raised  to  full  member- 
ship on  account  of  ceasing  to  reside  in  the  British 
Kingdom. 


CHAPTER  IV 


MATTHEW  PRATT  AND  THE  PEALES 

“ It  has  always  struck  me  that  historical  portrait 
galleries  far  transcend  in  worth  all  other  kinds  of 
national  collections  of  pictures  whatever;  in  fact, 
they  ought  to  exist  (for  many  reasons,  of  all  de- 
grees of  weight)  in  every  country,  as  among  the 
most  popular  and  cherished  national  possessions. 
. . . Often  I have  found  a portrait  superior  in  real 
instruction  to  half  a dozen  written  biographies,  as 
biographies  are  written;  or  rather  let  me  say,  I 
have  found  that  the  portrait  was  as  a small  lighted 
candle  by  which  the  biographies  could  for  the  first 
time  be  read,  and  some  human  interpretation  made 
of  them.”  Extract  from  a letter  from  Thomas  Car- 
lyle, addressed  to  David  Laing,  of  Edinborough, 
on  the  proposed  National  Exhibition  of  Scottish 
Portraits. 

The  earliest  American  portrait  painter  repre- 
sented in  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine 
Arts  is  Matthew  Pratt  (1734-1805),  whose  birth 
preceded  West’s  by  four  years.  His  admirable  por- 
traits of  Benjamin  West  and  his  wife,  Elizabeth 

69 


60  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  of  iFtne  Brts 


Shewed,  deserve  special  attention  in  the  Gallery  of 
Historic  Portraits,  to  which  we  now  make  our 
entrance,  as  being  portraits  painted  by  a native 
born  American  — a Philadelphian  — soon  after  he 
went  to  England  and  before  he  had  received  any 
foreign  influence  whatsoever. 

Matthew  Pratt  was  born  in  Philadelphia,  Sep- 
tember 23,  1734.  His  great-grandfather  was 

Henry  Pratt  of  Londontown,  pewterer,  who  emi- 
grated early  to  the  colonies.  His  father  was  Henry 
Pratt,  a goldsmith  and  a charter  member  of  the 
Philadelphia  Library  Company.  Henry  Pratt,  the 
father  of  the  artist,  was  married  in  Christ  Church 
to  Rebecca,  a daughter  of  Joseph  Claypoole,  a de- 
scendant of  Oliver  Cromwell  who  had  come  over 
to  Philadelphia  about  the  time  of  William  Penn. 

Of  the  ten  children  resulting  from  this  union, 
Matthew  was  the  fourth.  He  was  born  in  a house 
which  stood  at  the  corner  of  what  was  called  Tay- 
lor’s Alley,  on  Front  Street  between  Walnut  and 
Chestnut  Streets.  Historians  quaintly  tell  us  that 
at  the  age  of  ten  he  could  write  sixteen  different 
handwritings. 

At  fifteen  years  he  was  apprenticed  to  his  uncle 
James  Claypoole,  the  first  native  American  artist  of 
whom  we  have  information,  who  instructed  him,  to 
use  his  own  words,  “ in  all  the  branches  of  the 
painting  business,  particularly  portrait  painting.” 


flDattbew  Pratt  an&  tbe  peaies  61 


Having  served  his  time,  Pratt  set  up  in  business 
for  himself  as  a portrait  painter,  not  refusing  to 
take  orders  for  pictorial  signs,  many  of  which 
showed  the  hand  of  a true  artist.  He  is  said  to 
have  painted  a series  of  pictures  for  a grand  ball 
given  by  the  French  minister  Chevalier  de  la  Lu- 
zerne, in  1785,  in  celebration  of  the  birth  of  the 
Dauphin  of  France. 

His  first  sign  was  a representation  of  the  Con- 
stitutional Convention  of  1787,  which  contained 
portraits  of  the  members  and  attracted  a great  deal 
of  attention  from  the  populace,  who  delighted  to 
identify  the  portraits.  It  hung  at  the  southwest 
corner  of  Fourth  and  Chestnut  Streets.  Another, 
called  “ Fox  Chase,”  hung  on  the  north  side  of  Arch 
Street  above  Sixth,  and  his  “ Game  Cock  ” marked 
a beer  house  in  Spruce  Street  above  Fourth. 

In  1764  Pratt  accompanied  Benjamin  West’s 
father  and  future  bride  to  London  and  was  present 
at  West’s  wedding  in  London.  There  was  a dis- 
tant kinship  or  connection  between  Elizabeth 
Shewed  and  Matthew  Pratt  — the  lady’s  uncle 
Richard  having  married  Hannah  Pratt,  an  aunt  of 
Matthew  — and  romantic  historians  have  embel- 
lished the  story  of  the  engagement  and  marriage 
with  a delightful  adventure  in  which  they  have  not 
scrupled  to  mix  names  of  the  utmost  dignity  as 
accessory  to  the  deed. 


62  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  Jflne  arts 


Since  such  romantic  stories  are  as  leaven  to  the 
heavy  bread  of  fact,  and  since  there  is  no  direct  evi- 
dence to  refute  the  truth  of  the  legend,  as  well  as 
no  great  harm  in  it,  but  much  whimsical  humour, 
one  gives  it  for  what  it  is  worth,  in  the  interest  of 
diversion. 

The  story  goes  that  the  family  of  Elizabeth 
Shewell  disapproved  of  her  engagement  to  Ben- 
jamin West  and  that  on  his  departure  for  Europe 
they  shut  the  poor  girl  up  in  order  to  prevent  the 
lovers  from  bidding  each  other  good-bye.  When 
West  was  settled  in  London  and  on  the  fair  road 
to  success,  he  wrote  to  his  fiancee  claiming  the  ful- 
filment of  her  promise,  and  her  relatives,  hearing  of 
her  intended  departure,  locked  her  up  a second  time 
in  her  room,  to  prevent  her  escape. 

They  reckoned,  it  appears,  without  some  of  Phila- 
delphia’s most  worthy  citizens,  for  Elizabeth  es- 
caped at  night  by  means  of  a step-ladder  through 
the  aid  of  a trio  of  no  less  distinction  than  the  phi- 
losopher Franklin;  the  poet  and  wit,  Francis  Hop- 
kinson;  and  Pennsylvania’s  first  bishop,  William 
White. 

Authentic  history,  it  is  true,  is  silent  on  the  sub- 
ject and  the  escapade  is  mentioned  neither  in  the 
Autobiography  of  Franklin,  nor  in  the  Memoirs  of 
Bishop  White  (where  one  would  scarcely  look  for 
such  a story)  ; nor  does  Galt  allude  to  it  in  his  Life 


flbattbew  Pratt  anb  tbe  peales  63 


of  West.  Pratt  himself  says 1764.  June  24.  I 
took  my  departure  from  Philadelphia  in  company 
with  Betsy  Shewell  and  Mr.  John  West,  father  to 
the  famous  Benjamin  West,  bound  to  London, 
where  we  arrived  in  a passage  of  28  days.  In  a few 
weeks  after  our  arrival  (Sept.  2)  I had  the  pleasure 
of  officiating  as  father  in  the  marriage  ceremony 
at  St.  Martin’s  Church  in  the  Strand  in  joining 
Miss  Shewell  to  Mr.  Benjamin  West  as  a wife, 
they  having  been  engaged  to  each  other  in  Phila- 
delphia three  years  before  our  leaving  it  — to  the 
entire  satisfaction  of  all  their  friends  and  relatives.” 

Pratt  was  the  first  of  the  American  students  re- 
ceived into  West’s  home  as  a pupil,  and  he  remained 
four  years.  In  1768  he  returned  to  Philadelphia, 
took  a studio  and  found  plenty  of  employment.  He 
died  in  that  city  January  9,  1805,  the  year  of  the 
founding  of  The  Pennsylvania  Academy,  and  lies  in- 
terred in  the  family  vault  of  his  eldest  son,  Henry 
Pratt,  in  Christ  Church  burying  ground,  at  Fifth 
and  Arch  Streets. 

Pratt’s  best  known  work  is  the  full-length  por- 
trait of  Cadwallader  Coldem,  belonging  to  the  New 
York  Chamber  of  Commerce,  for  which  it  was 
painted  in  1773,  the  recompense  to  the  artist  being 
thirty-seven  pounds. 

The  portraits  of  West  and  his  wife,  owned  by  the 
Academy,  are  remarkable  for  their  simplicity  and 


64  H>enns£l\>ama  HcafcentE  of  jptne  Brts 


dignity,  their  character  and  originality,  and  for  a 
subtle  charm  of  colour  in  which  no  extraneous  influ- 
ence is  to  bei  detected.  The  pose  is  affected,  as  was 
the  manner  of  the  day,  but  its  artificiality  is  in  no 
wise  offensive.  They  were  presented  to  the  Acad- 
emy by  Mrs.  Rosalie  V.  Tiers  Jackson,  a great- 
granddaughter  of  the  artist. 

One  of  the  most  interesting  of  the  historical  por- 
traits in  the  possession  of  the  Academy  is  the  full 
length  of  “ The  Artist  in  his  Museum/’  painted  by 
Charles  Willson  Peale  (1741-1827). 

Peale  was  born  in  Chestertown,  on  the  eastern 
shore  of  Maryland,  April  16,  1741,  and  died  in 
Philadelphia  on  February  22,  1827,  and  is  buried 
in  St.  Peter’s  churchyard  at  Third  and  Pine  Streets. 

On  attaining  his  majority,  and  having  served  his 
time  with  a saddler  in  Annapolis,  he  commenced 
business  for  himself  and  extended  his  line  to  include 
coach-building,  clock-making,  silversmith  work  and 
finally  portrait  painting  — having  received  some 
slight  instruction  from  John  Hesselius.  Afterwards 
he  went  to  Boston  to  seek  the  advice  of  Copley,  the 
only  American  beside  Pratt  to  do  meritorious  work 
before  he  came  under  foreign  influence.  In  1768  he 
went  to  England  and  became  a member  of  Benjamin 
West’s  household,  and  under  West’s  direction 
studied  at  the  Royal  Academy,  meanwhile  painting 


flbattbew  Pratt  anb  tbe  peales  65 


miniatures  and  engraving  in  mezzotint.  His  first 
engraving  was  a folio  portrait  of  the  Earl  of  Chat- 
ham. Returning  to  this  country,  in  1770,  he  found 
constant  employment  and  gained  considerable  repu- 
tation in  painting  portraits  in  Annapolis  and  Balti- 
more. In  the  spring  of  1772  he  was  invited  to 
Mount  Vernon,  where  he  painted  the  first  portrait 
of  the  Virginia  colonel,  George  Washington.  He 
is  said  to  have  subsequently  painted  Washington 
fourteen  different  times. 

Peale  took  an  active  part  in  the  Revolutionary 
struggle,  both  as  citizen  and  soldier,  and  having  be- 
come possessed  with  the  idea  of  a National  Gallery, 
he  worked  energetically  upon  his  scheme  while  in 
the  army.  His  faith  in  the  Revolution  and  his  in- 
sight into  the  possibilities  it  furnished  for  the 
makers  of  heroes  seems  quite  extraordinary  in  one 
who  so  actively  allied  himself  with  the  pure  fighting 
side  of  the  cause.  He  followed  the  army  from  place 
to  place  and  in  the  pauses  of  action,  made  that  price- 
less collection  of  historic  portraits,  which  was  to 
constitute  his  National  Gallery. 

In  1784  he  established,  in  his  residence  at  the 
corner  of  Third  and  Lombard  Streets,  Philadelphia, 
his  famous  museum.  It  first  consisted  of  the  collec- 
tion of  historical  portraits.  In  1794  it  was  extended 
to  include  specimens  of  natural  history  and  was 
transferred  to  the  building  of  the  American  Philo- 


66  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  arts 


sophical  Society.  In  1802  it  was  removed  to  the 
State  House  and  it  was  while  located  there  that 
“ The  Artist  in  his  Museum  ” was  painted,  when 
Peak  was  in  his  eighty-third  year.  Subsequently  it 
was  taken  to  the  Arcade  and  ten  years  later  to  the 
Chinese  Museum.  Here  it  remained  six  years  and 
this  was  its  last  exhibition  in  its  entirety,  for  it  was 
dispersed  in  1854,  a great  many,  but  unfortunately 
not  all  of  the  portraits  having  been  purchased  by  the 
city,  and  placed,  as  was  Peak’s  original  intention,  in 
the  City  Museum  in  Independence  Hall. 

In  1791  Peale  attempted  to  form  an  association 
for  the  advancement  of  art  in  this  city  and  kept  at 
his  efforts  until,  in  1805,  he  became  one  of  the 
founders  of  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine 
Arts.  He  was  a director  of  the  institution  until 
1810  and  its  meetings  were  held  for  many  years  in 
his  museum. 

The  full-length  self  portrait  of  Peak  was  pre- 
sented to  the  Academy  in  1878  by  Mrs.  Joseph  Har- 
rison. It  was  the  artist’s  last  important  picture  and 
was  exhibited  in  1824,  the  same  year  it  was  painted. 
The  portrait  shows  Peak,  who  exhibits  in  his  well- 
preserved  person  all  the  ear-marks  of  an  aged,  but 
by  no  means  decrepit,  man,  in  the  act  of  lifting  a 
large  curtain  from  before  his  museum,  through 
which,  in  the  distance,  stroll  various  visitors  quaintly 
garbed  in  the  costume  of  the  day.  The  large  mam- 


ZlDattbew  ©ratt  an&  tbe  J>eales  67 


moth  skeleton  in  which  Peale,  it  is  supposed,  gave 
the  famous  supper  party  of  thirteen  guests,  is  partly 
visible  to  the  right,  and  about  the  table,  in  the  fore- 
ground, near  to  Peale,  stand  colossal  bones  and  an 
immense  jaw  of  some  pre-historic  monster.  A 
palette  and  brushes  lie  upon  the  table  and  at  the 
other  side  of  the  picture  a splendid  turkey  pecks 
inquisitively  at  a box  of  instruments. 

Divers  birds  are  ranged  along  the  shelves  of  the 
cases  which  line  the  wall  on  the  left  side  of  the 
room,  and  minute  investigation  reveals  in  the  front 
end  of  the  first  case  at  the  extreme  left  hand  side  of 
the  picture,  the  careful  painting  of  a curious 
stuffed  swordfish  about  which,  in  the  artist’s  hand, 
is  the  inscription : “ With  this  article  the  Museum 
commenced,  June,  1784.  Presented  by  Mr.  R. 
Patterson.” 

Peale,  himself,  makes  a striking  silhouette 
against  all  this  detail  of  background.  The  head 
is  very  well  painted  indeed,  and  shows  Peale  to 
have  been  a much  abler  painter  than  he  is  com- 
monly esteemed.  The  head  dominates  the  canvas 
absolutely,  despite  its  complexity,  and  the  hands, 
too,  are  full  of  character. 

The  Academy  owns  an  excellent  example  of  his 
early  portraiture  in  Peale’s  three-quarter  length 
seated  figure  of  Robert  Morris,  one  of  Philadel- 
phia’s most  prominent  citizens,  the  financier  of  the 


68  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


Revolution.  The  portrait  of  George  Clymer,  the 
first  president  of  the  Academy,  by  Peale,  hangs 
in  the  Board  Room  and  is  much  the  most  distin- 
guished in  character  of  all  the  portraits  of  Academy 
presidents  here  collected.  It  is  a bust,  facing  right, 
and  depicts  a man  with  positive  features,  resource- 
ful and  energetic,  as  we  know  Clymer  to  have 
been. 

Of  Peak’s  eleven  children,  Raphaelle  and  Rem- 
brandt lived  up,  in  a measure,  to  the  burden  of 
their  names  and  have  left  some  evidence  of  in- 
herited talent.  Raphaelle  Peak  (1774-1825) 
achieved  some  success  as  a still-life  painter,  and 
the  two  canvases  owned  by  the  Academy,  “ Fox 
Grapes  and  Peaches  ” and  “ Apples  and  Fox 
Grapes,”  are  examples  of  this  branch  of  his  art. 
They  are  small  panels,  signed  and  dated  — both 
were  painted  in  1815  and  neither  is  of  particular 
interest,  being  in  that  painfully  exact  vein  which 
characterized  still-life  painting  at  that  time. 

Rembrandt  Peak  (1778-1860)  is  the  best  known 
of  the  brothers.  He  showed  a talent  for  art  at  an 
early  age,  and  was  but  seventeen  when  he  painted 
a portrait  of  Washington,  from  whom  he  was  for- 
tunate enough  to  obtain  three  sittings.  He  studied 
with  his  father  and  under  Benjamin  West  and 
painted  portraits  in  London,  Savannah,  Charleston, 
New  York  and  Philadelphia.  His  best  work  was 


flbattbew  Pratt  anb  tbe  peales  69 


done  while  on  a visit  to  Paris  in  1807  and  again 
in  1809,  when  he  painted  the  portraits  of  distin- 
guished Frenchmen,  many  of  which  were  afterward 
placed  in  his  father’s  museum.  Of  these  the  Acad- 
emy owns  three,  that  of  Jacques  Louis  David,  the 
celebrated  contemporary  artist;  Dominique  Vivant 
Denon,  the  artist  and  author,  and  Jean  Antoine 
Houdon,  the  eminent  sculptor.  They  exhibit  a cer- 
tain vivacity  of  expression  and  character  as  op- 
posed to  the  vast  number  of  portraits  he  painted 
for  the  museum  on  his  return  to  this  country,  in 
which  ho  abused  his  style,  which  became  more  than 
perfunctory. 

This  quality  is  most  disagreeably  in  evidence  in 
the  careful  portrait  of  himself  with  spectacles  which 
■the  Academy  owns  and  which  bears  a dry,  search- 
ing, pedantic  expression  and  a total  lack  of  charm. 

One  can  imagine  him  doggedly  following  in  his 
father’s  footsteps  but  never  inspired  by  the  enthusi- 
asm or  misled  by  the  naivete  of  the  older  man. 

Rembrandt  Peale  was  president  of  the  Ameri- 
can Academy,  succeeding  Colonel  Trumbull,  and 
was  one  of  the  original  members  of  the  National 
Academy  of  Design.  His  best  work  was  his  por- 
trait of  Thomas  Jefferson  in  the  New  York  His- 
torical Society.  Like  his  father  he  painted  Wash- 
ington several  times,  the  last  and  most  notable  por- 
trait being  executed  in  1823.  It  was  exhibited  in 


70  Pennsylvania  Hcabemy  of  Jfine  Brts 


most  of  the  large  cities  of  the  United  States  and  in 
1832  was  bought  by  Congress  for  $2000. 

His  versatility  almost  equalled  that  of  his  father. 
He  was  one  of  the  first  to  practise  lithography  in 
the  United  States,  and  gained  a silver  medal  at  the 
Franklin  Institute,  in  1827,  for  a portrait  of  Wash- 
ington. 

He  is  further  represented  in  the  Academy  by  a 
portrait  of  Judge  Richard  Peters,  of  Belmont,  a 
small  panel  (7x9)  hanging  in  the  Field  Collection 
in  the  Print  Room,  and  by  his  portrait  in  the  Gilpin 
Gallery  of  Richard  Peters,  Jr.  A handsome  por- 
trait of  Audubon  (?)  the  famous  ornithologist, 
attributed  to  Winner,  is  possibly  by  Rembrandt 
Peale  at  his  best.  It  is  obviously  neither  of  Audu- 
bon nor  by  Winner,  nor  yet  by  Neagle  as  has  some- 
times been  thought. 

The  last  of  the  Peale  family  with  which  we  have 
to  do  is  James  Peale  (1749-1831),  a brother  of 
Charles  Willson,  who  is  charmingly  represented  in 
the  Academy  by  two  miniature  portraits  of  Reuben 
and  Frances  Gratz  Etting.  In  addition  to  these 
there  is  a portrait  of  Anna  and  Margaretta  Peale, 
daughters  of  the  artist,  which  was  purchased  in 
1902  and  added  to  the  portrait  collection  in  Gal- 
lery B. 


CHAPTER  V 


GILBERT  STUART  ( 1 75 5- 1 827) 

The  collection  of  twenty-four  Gilbert  Stuarts  is 
the  glory  of  the  galleries  of  The  Pennsylvania 
Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts.  No  better  opportunity 
can  be  found  for  the  study  of  Stuart’s  art  than  is 
afforded  by  this  collection,  which  is  undoubtedly 
the  best  representation  of  his  work  in  any  museum. 
Stuart  painted  in  Philadelphia  from  1795  to  1805, 
when  he  was  in  the  fulness  of  his  powers,  and  most 
of  these  canvases  are  of  this  period  and  come  direct 
from  the  descendants  of  the  originals  of  the  por- 
traits, nearly  all  of  whom  were  Philadelphians,  and 
constitute  for  Philadelphia  a gallery  of  portraiture, 
remarkable  for  its  historic  interest  as  well  as  a 
monument  to  the  ability  of  the  greatest  of  Ameri- 
can portrait  painters.  In  addition  to  this  it  may  be 
said  that  in  no  other  gallery  of  the  world  may  the 
work  of  any  one  artist  be  studied  to  the  same  ad- 
vantage as  may  that  of  Gilbert  Stuart  be  followed 
in  the  gallery  of  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of 
the  Fine  Arts. 

It  is  a famous  Scottish  boast  that  all  the  shining 
71 


72  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  ot  fine  Brts 


lights,  in  no  matter  what  department  of  intellectual 
achievement,  amongst  the  Anglo-Saxons,  have  been 
Scotchmen.  An  Englishman  goaded  to  retort  by 
the  constantly  reiterated  assertion  on  the  part  of  a 
friend  is  said  to  have  cited  Shakespeare  as  a proof 
to  the  contrary,  when  the  undaunted  Scot  replied, 
“ Weel,  if  he  wasna  a Scotsman  he  was  clever 
enough  to  be  yen.” 

Gilbert  Stuart  was  no  exception  to  the  rule.  He 
was  of  Scottish  parentage,  born  in  what  was  for- 
merly Narragansett  country,  now  the  village  of 
Hammond  Mills,  North  Kingston,  Rhode  Island,  on 
December  3,  1755.  The  humble  house  dedicated  to 
his  memory,  an  old-fashioned,  gambrel-roofed 
structure,  at  the  head  of  Petaquamscott  Pond,  still 
stands,  and  at  the  time  of  Stuart’s  birth  formed  part 
of  the  old  snuff  mill  set  up  by  Gilbert  Stewart,1  the 
painter’s  father,  who  came  from  Perth  in  Scotland 
•to  introduce  the  manufacture  of  snuff  into  the 
colonies.  At  an  early  period  in  the  life  of  Stuart 
the  family  removed  to  Newport,  and  it  is  there  that 
we  find  the  earliest  picture  that  can  be  recognized 
as  the  work  of  the  painter.  This  is  a pair  of 
Spanish  dogs  belonging  to  Dr.  William  Hunter  of 
Newport,  said  to  have  been  painted  by  Stuart  in  his 
fourteenth  year.  The  hand  of  the  restorer  has  left 

1 The  family  name  was  spelled  Stewart  until  Gilbert,  the  painter, 
changed  it  to  its  present  form. 


Gilbert  Stuart 


73 


very  little  of  the  original  brushwork  in  the  por- 
traits of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Bannister,  claimed  to  be  his 
first  efforts  in  this  direction. 

Stuart’s  first  master  in  drawing  was  Cosmo  Alex- 
ander, a Scotchman,  who  visited  the  colonies  and 
painted  a number  of  portraits  in  the  manner  of  that 
time.  He  was  a great-grandson  of  George  Jameson, 
whom  Walpole  calls  the  Scottish  Van  Dyck.  On 
his  return  to  Scotland  Stuart  accompanied  him,  but 
shortly  after  their  arrival  in  Edinborough,  the  death 
of  Alexander  threw  Stuart  upon  his  own  resources 
and  the  lad  was  obliged  to  work  his  passage  home 
on  a Nova  Scotia  collier,  after  only  a few  months’ 
absence,  under  circumstances  so  painful  that  it  is 
said  that  he  could  never  be  induced  to  talk  about 
it.  This  was  in  1773,  a period  of  intense  excite- 
ment in  the  colonies  which  were  on  the  verge  of  the 
Revolution,  to  which  Stuart  seems  to  have  been  so 
indifferent  that  he  reembarked  for  England  two 
years  later  on  the  eve  of  the  Battle  of  Bunker  Hill, 
with  the  object  of  escaping  from  an  atmosphere 
so  little  suited  to  his  advancement  in  ant,  and 
in  quest  of  instruction  from  Benjamin  West,  then 
the  dean  of  American  painters,  established  in  Lon- 
don. 

On  arriving  in  London,  Stuart  seems  to  have 
lacked  the  hardihood  to  address  himself,  unknown 
and  without  resources,  to  his  future  patron,  and 


74  Pennsylvania  Bcabeniy  ot  fine  Brts 

picked  up  a precarious  living  as  organist  of  a church 
on  a salary  of  thirty  pounds.  Finally  after  two 
years’  desultory  work  he  gained  the  courage  born 
of  necessity  to  call  upon  West,  who  received  him 
into  his  family  as  apprentice  and  friend. 

For  five  years  Stuart  toiled  in  the  studio  of  the 
gentle  old  master  until,  tired  of  a work  which 
brought  him  no  recognition  and  probably  no 
greater  compensation  than  the  sober  certainties  of 
board  and  lodging,  he  set  up  for  himself  in  New 
Burlington  Street.  Dunlap  quotes  Stuart  as  having 
said  of  this  period  of  apprenticeship : “ When  I had 
finished  a copy  of  a portrait  for  my  old  master,  that 
I knew  he  was  to  have  a good  price  for,  and  he  gave 
me  a guinea,  I used  to  think  it  hard  — but  when  I 
looked  on  the  establishment  around  me,  which  with 
his  instruction  I enjoyed,  and  knew  it  was  yet  to  be 
paid  for,  I fully  exonerated  West  from  the  charge 
of  niggardliness,  and  cheerfully  contributed  my 
labour  in  return  for  his  kindness.,, 

West  appears  to  have  had  no  influence  upon  the 
work  of  the  younger  painter.  Stuart’s  debt  to  him 
was  nevertheless  great  since  it  was  through  his 
association  with  the  King’s  painter  that  Stuart  met 
many  of  the  distinguished  members  of  London  soci- 
ety who  afterwards  became  his  sitters.  During  his 
apprenticeship  West  also  allowed  him  time  to  draw 
in  the  schools  of  the  Royal  Academy  and  to  attend 


Gilbert  Stuart 


75 


the  lectures  of  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds  and  Cruikshank, 
and  the  year  after  he  went  to  West,  1777,  he  figured 
as  an  exhibitor  in  the  Royal  Academy. 

In  1782  he  painted  his  so-called  chef  d} oeuvre,  a 
full-length  portrait  of  William  Grant,  Esq.,  of  Con- 
galton,  skating  in  St.  James’  Park.  This  was  en- 
tered in  the  catalogue  of  the  Royal  Academy,  where 
it  was  included  amongst  a little  group  of  paintings, 
Stuart’s  last  contribution  to  the  exhibitions  of  that 
institution,  simply  as  “ A Portrait  of  a Gentleman 
Skating.”  The  picture  is  remarkable  in  its  expres- 
sion of  the  motion  of  the  skater,  while  its  quality  as 
a painting  may  be  estimated  from  the  following 
incident : — 

An  exhibition  of  Pictures  by  the  Old  Masters 
was  held  at  Burlington  House,  in  January,  1878, 
and  this  portrait  was  among  the  exhibits  accredited 
to  Gainsborough,  and  attracted  marked  attention. 
Among  the  notices  of  the  exhibition  was  one  pub- 
lished in  the  Saturday  Review  in  which  the 
writer  said,  “ Turning  to  the  English  School,  we 
may  observe  a most  striking  portrait  in  No.  128, 
in  Gallery  III.  This  is  set  down  as  ‘ Portrait  of 
W.  Grant,  Esq.,  of  Congalton,  Skating  in  St.  James’ 
Park:’  Thomas  Gainsborough,  R.  A.  ( ?)  The 
query  is  certainly  pertinent,  for  while  it  is  difficult 
to  believe  that  we  do  not  recognize  Gainsborough’s 
hand  in  the  graceful  and  silvery  look  of  the  land- 


76  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  fftne  Brts 


scape  in  the  background,  it  is  not  easy  to  reconcile 
the  flesh  tones  of  the  portrait  itself  with  any  pre- 
conceived notion  of  Gainsborough’s  workmanship. 
The  face  has  a peculiar  firmness  and  decision  in 
drawing,  which  reminds  one  rather  of  Raeburn  than 
of  Gainsborough.” 

The  authorship  of  the  picture  then  became  the 
subject  of  a heated  discussion  between  partisans  of 
Romney,  Raeburn,  Shee  and  Gainsborough,  until 
the  controversy  was  ended  by  a grandson  of  Grant, 
who  came  out  with  the  statement  that  the  portrait 
was  by  “ the  great  portrait  painter  of  America,  Gil- 
bert Stuart.” 

The  success  of  the  Grant  portrait  assured  the 
career  of  the  painter.  Following  its  exhibition  at 
the  Royal  Academy,  commissions  for  portraits  came 
with  every  post  and  the  painter  lived  in  a state  of 
luxury,  spending  his  money  with  a royal  hand  and 
dispensing  hospitality  like  a prince.  His  prices  for 
the  portraits  done  at  this  period  were  only  inferior 
to  those  of  Romney  and  Gainsborough,  whose  peer 
he  rapidly  became,  painting  in  collaboration  with 
the  latter  a full-length  portrait  of  Henry,  Earl  of 
Carnarvon.  This  work  was  engraved  by  William 
Ward  and  the  names  of  the  two  painters  are  in- 
scribed upon  the  plate. 

Stuart  remained  in  London  until  1788,  painting 
numerous  portraits  of  prominent  people  who  became 


Gilbert  Stuart 


77 


his  friends  as  well  as  his  patrons.  He  painted  dur- 
ing his  sojourn  there  Boydell,  Gainsborough,  John 
Philip  Kendall,  the  Duke  of  Northumberland,  Ad- 
miral Sir  John  Jervis,  Dr.  Fothergill  and  the  Dukes 
pf  Manchester  and  Leinster.  He  married,  in  1786, 
Miss  Charlotte  Coates,  the  daughter  of  a Berkshire 
physician.  In  his  thirty-third  year  he  removed  to 
Dublin  and  opened  a studio  there,  where  he  re- 
mained four  years  and  painted  a number  of  nota- 
bles, members  of  the  Privy  Council,  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor, lords  and  ecclesiastics  including  the  Very 
Reverend  William  Preston,  Bishop  of  Killaloe, 
who  was  a generous  benefactor  of  the  Library 
Company  of  Philadelphia  and  whose  portrait,  by 
Benjamin  West,  hangs  in  the  building  at  Juni- 
per and  Locust  Streets.  Some  of  Stuart’s  finest 
works  are  to  be  found  in  and  about  the  Irish  capi- 
tal. 

The  gay  life  that  he  led  both  in  England  and 
Ireland,  and  his  lavish  hospitality,  led  him  to  un- 
believable extremes  of  fortune.  It  is  said  that  he 
went  to  Ireland  to  escape  imprisonment  for  debt,  an 
ignominy  he  had  more  than  once  suffered  during  his 
residence  in  London.  He  boasted  of  having 
“painted  himself  out  of  jail  ” in  Dublin,  where  he 
got  around  the  jailor  by  painting  his  portrait,  in 
consideration  of  which  honour  the  good  man  con- 
nived at  his  escape.  When  the  fever  to  return  to 


78  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  ot  iftne  arts 


America  was  strong  within  him  he  began  a number 
of  portraits  in  Dublin,  for  which  he  was  paid  half 
price  at  the  first  sittings,  and  having  thus  acquired 
the  wherewithal  for  his  passage  home  left  the  work 
unfinished  without  an  apparent  qualm  of  conscience. 
He  eventually  painted  the  ship’s  owner  in  exchange 
for  his  transportation. 

He  arrived  in  New  York  in  1792  and,  after  two 
years,  came  to  Philadelphia  in  November  of  1794. 
At  the  time  of  his  return  to  his  native  land  there 
were  only  four  portrait  painters  of  note  in  the  coun- 
try. These  were  Charles  Willson  Peale,  Matthew 
Pratt,  Ralph  Earl  and  John  Trumbull,  each  of  them 
a reputable  artist  in  his  way  and  much  more  capable 
than  is  commonly  admitted,  owing  to  the  fact  of 
their  talents  having  been  obscured  by  the  brilliant 
prowess  of  the  newcomer,  Stuart,  whose  return 
marks  an  important  epoch  in  the  history  of  Ameri- 
can art,  giving  to  it  an  impetus  which  lasted  well 
on  into  the  century  in  which  he  died. 

Stuart’s  avowed  purpose  in  returning  was  to  paint 
the  President,  but  while  biographers  have  made 
much  of  a strain  of  glorious  patriotism  which  was 
supposed  to  underlie  the  wish,  Stuart,  to  judge  by 
his  own  words,  seems  to  have  regarded  it  as  a purely 
business  proposition.  He  is  quoted  as  having  said 
to  Herbert,  the  author  of  “ Irish  Varieties,”  when 
speaking  of  his  contemplated  return  to  his  native 


Gilbert  Stuart 


79 


land,  “ There  I expect  to  make  a fortune  by  Wash- 
ington alone.” 

When  he  arrived  in  Philadelphia,  during  the 
winter  of  1794-5,  he  was  at  once  fortunate  in 
making  the  acquaintance  of  that  staunch  Scot,  Dr. 
William  Smith,  the  friend  and  patron  of  West’s 
youth,  the  Provost  of  the  University  of  Pennsyl- 
vania. Dr.  Smith  gave  the  painter  his  start  in 
Philadelphia  by  presenting  him  with  a house  on  his 
own  property  at  Falls  of  the  Schuylkill,  in  which  to 
live,  and  providing  him  a studio  in  the  house  of  his 
son,  William  Moore  Smith.  This  was  at  the  south- 
east corner  of  Fifth  and  Chestnut  Streets,  on  the 
site  of  the  present  Drexel  Bank.  Later  he  removed 
to  Germantown  and  the  ruins  of  the  building  which 
he  occupied  may  still  be  seen  on  the  estate  of  Mr. 
William  Rotch  Wister. 

The  William  Smith  who  befriended  Benjamin 
West  was  a young  man  under  thirty.  Stuart  knew 
him  toward  the  end  of  his  useful  and  unselfish  life 
and  painted  his  portrait  at  the  age  of  about  sixty- 
eight.  This  was  one  of  the  first  commissions  that 
he  received  in  Philadelphia  and  one  of  his  most 
noted  portraits. 

Stuart’s  house  on  Chestnut  Street  soon  became 
the  resort  of  many  prominent  and  fashionable  per- 
sons. Philadelphia,  at  that  time,  was  unusually  at- 
tractive. It  was  the  seat  of  the  government  and  its 


80  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  fine  Brts 


society  included  representatives  of  the  best  people 
from  all  parts  of  the  Union  as  well  as  many  distin- 
guished foreigners. 

The  President  was,  of  course,  in  residence,  and 
Mrs.  Washington,  as  a leader  of  a brilliant  circle, 
gave  those  delightful  entertainments  which  have 
been  described  in  “ The  Republican  Court.”  Stuart, 
with  the  polish  of  the  Old  World  about  him,  it  may 
be  imagined,  was  received  everywhere  and  knew 
everyone.  His  sitters  were  selected  from  the  choi- 
cest flowers  of  the  court  of  Martha  Washington 
and  the  galaxy  of  soldiers  and  statesmen  who  sur- 
rounded the  President.  In  the  gay  social  whirl  in 
which  he  found  himself,  he  became  a prominent 
figure  because  of  his  gracious  manners,  his  social 
qualities  and  his  savoir  faire.  He  played  upon  a 
number  of  instruments,  particularly  the  harpsichord, 
had  a sweet  tuneful  voice  and  a ready,  sparkling 
wit.  His  adaptability  made  him  a welcome  guest  at 
all  forms  of  entertainment,  and  of  this  brilliant  soci- 
ety he  has  left  us  quite  a gallery  of  the  beauties  and 
notables  of  Washington’s  administration.  He 

painted  Mrs.  Washington,  Mrs.  Bingham,  the 
Marchioness  D’Yrujo,  Mrs.  Blodgett,  the  beautiful 
daughter  of  Dr.  Smith,  and  many  others,  and  he 
achieved  within  the  first  few  years  of  his  residence 
in  Philadelphia  his  famous  three  portraits  of  Wash- 
ington. 


Gilbert  Stuart 


81 


Stuart  lived  in  Philadelphia  for  about  ten  years 
and  then  after  a short  sojourn  in  Washington,  re- 
moved to  Boston  in  1805,  and  there  he  remained 
until  his  death,  July  27,  1828. 

It  is  painful  to  record  that  through  a constitu- 
tional lack  of  industry  and  never  from  any  lack  of 
appreciation  or  failure  of  patronage,  he  died  in  a 
state  of  indigence,  bordering  upon  actual  want, 
leaving  his  family  practically  destitute,  except  for 
the  original  of  his  famous  head  of  Washington. 

Pilgrims  to  the  grave  of  Gilbert  Stuart  are  di- 
rected to  a tablet  erected  to  his  memory,  within 
recent  years,  on  Boston  Common.  While  this  is 
claimed  to  be  the  spot  where  the  painter  was  in- 
terred in  the  then  Potter’s  Field,  his  actual  resting 
place  is  lost  to  accurate  history. 

The  piece  de  resistance  of  the  Stuart  Collection  is 
the  full-length  portrait  of  George  Washington, 
signed  and  dated,  “ G.  Stuart,  1796,”  and  familiarly 
known  as  the  Lansdowne  portrait.  It  was  received 
from  the  estate  of  William  Bingham,  for  whom  it 
was  painted,  as  one  of  the  earliest  bequests  to  the 
new  Academy,  in  the  sixth  year  of  its  organization, 
1811. 

Gilbert  Stuart  painted  three  original  portraits  of 
Washington  from  life,  the  first  showing  the  right 
side  of  the  face  and  the  second  and  third  facing  left. 
The  first  was  a full  bust,  the  second  a full-length  and 


82  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  of  fine  Brts 


the  third  a vignette  head.  They  have  become  of- 
ficially known  from  the  names  of  their  original 
owners  in  the  order  of  their  painting  as  the 
Vaughan,  the  Lansdowne  and  the  Athenaeum  types, 
but  the  only  one  whose  authenticity  as  an  original 
life  portrait  has  never  been  questioned  is  the 
Athenaeum  portrait,  which  was  retained  by  Stuart 
during  his  life  and  is  now  in  the  Museum  of  Fine 
Arts,  Boston. 

The  date  of  the  painting  of  the  first  portrait  is  not 
known  but  it  appears  to  have  been  early  in  the  year 
1795,  soon  after  the  painter’s  arrival  in  Phila- 
delphia, whither  he  came  armed  with  a letter  of  in- 
troduction to  the  President  from  John  Jay.  The 
time  of  Stuart’s  coming  to  Philadelphia  is  referred 
to  in  a letter  written  by  Mrs.  Jay  to  her  husband, 
then  in  London,  dated  New  York,  November  15, 
1794,  in  which  she  says:  “ In  ten  days  he  (Stuart) 
is  to  go  to  Philadelphia  to  take  a likeness  of  the 
President.” 

A memorandum  has  been  found  in  Stuart’s  hand 
of  a list  of  “ thirty-two  gentlemen  who  are  to  have 
copies  of  the  portraits  of  the  first  President  of  the 
United  States.”  How  many  of  these  were  made 
from  the  first  portrait  is  not  known  and  the  identity 
of  that  first  portrait  has  never  been  established  to 
the  satisfaction  of  everybody.  Stuart  himself  said 
that  he  destroyed  it,  but  his  word  is  disputed  by 


Gilbert  Stuart 


83 


authoritative  writers  backed  up  by  more  or  less 
conclusive  evidence  to  the  contrary.  Of  the  six 
copies  that  have  been  discovered,  each  shows  some 
variance  from  the  others. 

Of  these  there  is  the  Gibbs-Channing  portrait 
sold  to  Stuart’s  personal  friend  Colonel  George 
Gibbs,  of  New  York,  from  whom  it  passed  to  the 
Colonel’s  sister,  Mrs.  Channing,  whose  son  Dr. 
William  F.  Channing  sold  it  to  the  late  S.  P.  Avery, 
from  whom  it  was  acquired  by  the  Metropolitan 
Museum.  There  is  the  Vaughan  portrait  proper, 
from  which  Holloway’s  print  was  engraved  and 
published  November,  1796,  in  Lavater’s  “ Physiog- 
nomy.” It  was  at  this  time  in  the  possession  of  Mr. 
Samuel  Vaughan  of  London,  a staunch  friend  of 
Franklin  and  admirer  of  Washington.  This  pic- 
ture is  still  in  the  custody  of  the  estate  of  Mrs. 
Joseph  Harrison.  A third  portrait,  claimed  to  be 
the  first,  was  discovered  and  purchased  in  1892  by 
Mr.  Charles  Henry  Hart  and  is  now  owned  by  Mr. 
Marsden  J.  Perry  of  Providence,  Rhode  Island. 
This  picture  is  said  to  have  belonged  to  William 
Bingham  and  to  have  been  bought  at  the  public 
auction  of  the  contents  of  his  house  in  1807,  by 
James  Kitchen,  the  proprietor  of  the  Merchants’ 
Exchange  Coffee  House,  located  a block  distant 
from  Bingham’s  house.  Upon  Kitchen’s  death  in 
1828  the  picture  was  inherited  by  his  son,  an  emi- 


84  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  arts 


nent  physician  of  Philadelphia,  who  lived  to  his 
ninety-fourth  year,  and  from  whom  i,t  was  pur- 
chased in  1892  after  having  been  in  his  family  for 
eighty-five  years. 

In  April  of  the  following  year  Stuart  executed 
his  second  portrait  of  the  President  from  life,  a 
full-length  standing  figure  facing  left  with  the  right 
hand  extended  as  if  in  speaking,  similar  in  pose  and 
composition  to  the  portrait  of  Bossuet  by  Rigaud, 
familiar  through  engraving.  This  Lansdowne 
portrait  is  a ceremonial  picture,  full  of  imposing 
dignity,  representing  Washington  as  the  executive 
head  of  the  nation,  in  contradistinction  to  the  other 
two  known  types,  which  give  an  intimate  study  of 
the  personality  of  the  man. 

Although  until  recent  years  the  Academy’s  full- 
length  portrait  was  universally  accepted  as  a replica 
of  the  original  Lansdowne  portrait  in  the  present 
possession  of  the  Earl  of  Rosebery,  there  is  in 
point  of  fact  some  doubt  as  to  which  is  the  original 
of  the  two  portraits  which  Stuart  is  krlown  to  have 
painted  for  William  Bingham,  a prominent  citizen 
of  Philadelphia,  a friend  and  patron  of  Stuart 
and  intimately  associated  in  both  business  and 
social  relations  with  America’s  friend,  the  Earl 
of  Shelburne,  afterward  first  Marquis  of  Lans- 
downe. 

William  Bingham  was  an  early  figure  in  the 


Gilbert  Stuart 


85 


history  of  the  country.  He  was  a man  of  wealth 
and  position,  two  factors  which  he  considerably 
strengthened  by  his  marriage  in  1780  to  Anne,  the 
eldest  of  the  daughters  of  Thomas  Willing,  one  of 
the  leading  patriots  of  Colonial  days.  In  1795  Mr. 
Bingham  was  made  United  States  Senator  from 
Pennsylvania  and  served  until  1801.  It  was  during 
some  years  spent  abroad  in  both  public  and  private 
capacity  that  the  friendship  was  formed  between 
the  distinguished  Philadelphian  and  the  English 
nobleman  in  whose  honour  “ Lansdowne,”  the  his- 
toric country  seat  of  the  Binghams,  acquired  about 
this  time,  was  named.  This  estate  and  mansion  had 
been  built  before  the  Revolution  by  John  Penn  and 
was  one  of  the  most  attractive  in  the  country. 
Washington  was  frequently  entertained  here  and 
under  the  gracious  reign  of  its  beautiful  hostess  it 
became  one  of  the  most  hospitable  residences  in  the 
environs  of  Philadelphia. 

The  sittings  for  the  portrait  were  arranged  for 
by  Mrs.  Bingham  as  referred  to  in  a letter  from 
Washington  to  Stuart  dated  Monday  evening, 
nth  April,  1796,  in  which  the  President  inquires 
whether  he  is  to  pose  at  Stuart’s  own  house  or  at 
the  State  House  and  which  begins : “ Sir : I am 
under  promise  to  Mrs.  Bingham  to  sit  for  you  to- 
morrow, at  nine  o’clock,  etc.”  Of  the  two  portraits 
painted  at  this  time,  one  was  retained  by  Mr.  Bing- 


86  Pennsylvania  Hca&emy  of  ffine  Brts 


ham  for  his  own  house,  Lansdowne,  and  the  other 
was  sent  to  England  as  a present  to  his  noble 
friend. 

The  significant  fact  in  support  of  the  priority  of 
the  Academy’s  canvas  is  its  signature  and  date, 
while  to  support  his  claim  'to  the  original  portrait 
the  Earl  of  Rosebery  has  hung  beside  his  picture 
an  original  autograph  letter  signed  by  Gilbert 
Stuart  and  witnessed  by  three  names  certifying  to 
the  authenticity  and  originality  of  that  portrait. 
The  whole  controversy,  which  is  a most  interesting 
one,  has  been  made  the  subject  of  a valuable  article 
written  by  Mr.  Charles  Henry  Hart,  who  has  done 
so  much  original  research  work  along  these  lines, 
and  which  appeared  in  Harper's  Monthly  Magazine 
for  August,  1896. 

Mr.  Hart  believes  that  the  Academy’s  picture  is 
the  original  and  that  Lord  Rosebery’s  is  the  replica. 
He  bases  this  belief  upon  what  he  calls  the  intrinsic 
evidence  of  the  picture’s  originality,  its  freedom 
and  animation,  and  upon  the  important  fact  that  it 
is  signed  and  dated  “ G.  Stuart,  1796,”  while  the 
other  is  neither  signed  nor  dated. 

After  the  death  of  the  Marquis  of  Lansdowne 
his  pictures  were  sold,  and  Stuart’s  Washington  was 
purchased  by  Mr.  Samuel  Williams,  a British  mer- 
chant, for  five  hundred  and  forty  pounds  and  fifteen 
shillings. 


Gilbert  Stuart 


87 


Mr.  Williams  becoming  insolvent,  his  creditors 
disposed  of  the  picture  by  a lottery  of  forty  tickets 
at  fifty  guineas  each,  when  it  became  the  property 
of  John  Delaware  Lewis,  M.  P.,  who,  in  1876,  sent 
it  to  this  country  for  exhibition  in  Philadelphia,  at 
the  Centennial  Exhibition,  where  it  was  hung  in  the 
British  section.  The  picture  subsequently  passed 
into  the  hands  of  the  Earl  of  Rosebery. 

In  1823  Stuart  gave  to  Samuel  Williams  the 
autograph  letter  he  had  received  from  Washington 
above  referred  to.  Upon  it  he  placed  the  following 
certificate : “ In  looking  over  my  papers  to  find  one 
that  had  the  signature  of  George  Washington,  I 
found  this  asking  me  when  he  should  sit  for  his 
portrait  which  is  now  owned  by  Samuel  Williams  of 
London.  I have  thought  it  proper  that  it  should  be 
his,  especially  as  he  owns  the  only  original  painting 
I ever  made  of  Washington,  except  one  that  I own 
myself.  I painted  a third  but  rubbed  it  out.  I now 
present  this  to  his  brother,  Timo.  Williams,  for  said 
Samuel.  Boston,  9th  day  of  March,  1823.  Gilbert 
Stuart.”  The  paper  is  witnessed,  Isaac  P.  Davis, 
W.  Dutton  and  L.  Baldwin.  This  is  the  paper  that 
has  come  to  the  Earl  of  Rosebery  with  the  portrait 
and  hangs  framed  beside  it. 

The  engraving  of  the  portrait  which  led  to  so 
much  hard  feeling  between  Stuart  and  Mr.  Bing- 
ham is  produced  by  Mr.  Hart  in  his  evidence  of  the 


88  Pennsylvania  Hcabemy  of  ffine  Hrts 

priority  of  the  Academy’s  painting.  This  was  made 
by  an  English  engraver,  Thomas  Heath,  from 
Lord  Lansdowne’s  picture  and  was  signed  and 
dated  Gabriel  Stuart,  1797.  Of  this  circumstance 
Mr.  Hart  says : “ Another  potent  fact  is  that  the 
contemporary  engraving  of  the  Lansdowne  picture 
by  Thomas  Heath  gives  the  date  of  the  painting 
as  1797,  while  the  Bingham  picture,  as  we  have 
seen,  is  dated  1796.  As  both  portraits  were  painted 
for  William  Bingham  it  is  not  at  all  unlikely  that 
the  original  was  signed  and  dated  by  the  artist  to 
ear-mark  it  and  was  retained  in  this  country  inten- 
tionally, very  possibly  at  Stuart’s  own  suggestion 
for  his  use  in  painting  duplicates.” 

Stuart  made  several  replicas,  one  for  William 
Constable  of  New  York  in  which  there  is  a 
change  in  the  lighting,  and  afterward  made  a 
number  of  full-lengths  of  the  President,  varying 
the  pose,  of  which  the  best  is  in  the  Lenox 
Library. 

The  Academy  has  preserved  throughout  the  con- 
troversy a negative  attitude  and  the  picture  is  con- 
servatively labelled,  “ replica.”  The  canvas  is  in 
perfect  condition,  having  done  almost  no  travelling. 
When  it  was  finished  it  was  hung  in  the  mansion  at 
Lansdowne  and  upon  the  death  of  William  Bingham 
was  transferred  to  the  gallery  of  the  Academy  and 
has  hung  there  undisturbed  throughout  a full  cen- 


Gilbert  Stuart 


89 


tury.  The  signature  is  plainly  visible  |in  the  lower 
left  hand  corner  of  the  canvas.1  The  colour  is  as 
fresh  as  the  day  it  was  painted  and  exhibits  all  the 
rich  variety  and  truth  to  nature  for  which  the 
painter  was  noted.  The  picture  is  a noble  and  im- 
pressive presentment  of  a distinguished  man  and  a 
superb  example  of  the  best  period  of  the  work  of 
Philadelphia’s  master  painter. 

Of  the  Athenaeum,  or  household  portrait  of 
Washington,  the  Academy  owns  one  of  many 
replicas,  which  was  bequeathed  to  the  institution 
by  Paul  Beck  in  1845.  It  has  suffered  materially 
in  restoration.  The  original  was  the  painter’s 
favourite  and  he  retained  it  unfinished  through  life, 
making  from  it  a vast  number  of  completed  copies, 
of  uneven  merit.  It  was  upon  this  picture  that 
Stuart  realized  a quota  of  the  fortune  he  had  ex- 
pected to  derive  from  his  portraits  of  the  President. 
But  it  became  mere  pot-boiling,  so  to  speak.  The 
regular  price  was  one  hundred  dollars  and  Stuart 
has  been  much  quoted  as  referring  to  these  copies 
as  his  “ hundred  dollar  pieces.”  One  of  the  best  of 
these  copies  hangs  in  the  Historical  Society,  the  gift 
of  Francis  Rawle  Wharton. 

u Stuart  was  preeminently  a colourist  and  his 
place,  judged  by  the  highest  canons  of  art,  is  un- 

1This  is  one  of  the  only  two  known  examples  of  Stuart  that  are 
signed. 


90  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  fftne  Hrts 


questionably  among  the  few  recognized  masters  of 
portraiture.’’ 

This  quotation,  from  the  Encyclopaedia  Britan- 
nica,  is  entitled  to  greater  weight  as  being  unbiassed 
by  national  prejudice,  and  a consideration  of  the 
twenty-four  canvases  exhibited  in  the  Academy  1 is 
most  convincing  of  the  truth  of  this  assertion  from 
the  other  side  of  the  water.  No  master  before 
or  since  has  given  so  true  an  impression  of  the 
colour  of  flesh,  and  in  his  proficiency  he  seems  never 
to  have  fallen  into  a recipe,  the  pitfall  of  success. 
Each  sitter  was  a new  problem  of  colour  and  his 
portraits  present  as  much  variety  in  this  regard  as 
did  the  sitters  themselves. 

His  work  divides  itself  into  two  distinct  periods. 
The  first,  or  English  period,  reflects  the  influence 
of  the  great  painters  of  Great  Britain  with  whom 
he  came  into  contact  during  his  formative  years  of 
study  and  early  achievement.  It  is  marked  by  a 
delicate  precision  in  the  drawing  and  by  a slight 
artificiality  of  colouring  whose  pearly  greys  suggest 
the  similar  effects  of  Romney,  Gainsborough  and 
the  other  portrait  painters  of  the  British  School 
with  whom,  as  we  have  seen,  his  work  was  at  times 
confused. 

1 Of  the  Academy’s  collection,  twenty-one  are  owned  by  the 
institution,  three  are  on  deposit.  The  portrait  of  James  Madison 
included  in  the  group  as  a pendant  to  the  excellent  portrait  of 
Dolly  Madison,  is  a copy,  and  not  from  Stuart’s  hand. 


(Albert  Stuart 


91 


Stuart’s  return  to  America  marks  the  assertion 
of  his  own  intense  personality,  a coming  into  his 
full  power  as  an  individualist ; and  exhibits  a robust- 
ness, a vigour,  a strength  of  characterization  and  a 
richness  of  colour  that  carry  him  beyond  the  limita- 
tions of  the  cleverest  of  the  British  School,  which 
formed  him  into  a manner  as  distinctly  his  own  as 
was  that  of  any  of  his  distinguished  compeers  across 
the  water. 

He  has  been  represented  to  us  by  his  biographers 
as  an  eccentric,  but  many  of  the  clever  and  witty 
retorts  recorded  to  show  how  inconsistent  and  un- 
reasonable he  was  may  be  perfectly  understood  as 
the  defence  of  a great  portrait  painter  struggling 
against  the  opposing  spirit  of  the  sitter,  a position, 
as  every  one  knows,  exceedingly  hard.  Mr.  Hart, 
who  seems  to  have  understood  him,  writes : “ Stuart 
was  a many-sided  character  in  his  mental  and 
physical  temperament.  He  could  be  as  gruff  as  a 
bear  and  as  sweet  as  a woman;  as  ill-mannered  as 
a twentieth  century  youth  and  as  courtly  as  a knight 
of  old;  as  unscrupulous  as  a tricky  money  lender 
and  as  honourable  as  a judge.  And  in  everything 
he  was  lavish.  He  was  a man  of  extremes ; always 
hot  or  cold,  never  temperate.  He  could  be  dainty 
to  effeminacy  and  gross  almost  to  brutality.  His 
art  was  of  course  imbued  with  these  characteristics 
to  a greater  or  less  degree  and  they  enable  us  to 


92  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  ot  fftne  Brts 


understand  why  his  men  were  so  robust  and  his 
women  so  refined,  why  his  portraits  were  never  of 
a class  but  always  of  the  individual.  He  under- 
stood it  all  — all  the  different  grades  and  de- 
grees.” 

As  a rule  Stuart’s  interest  in  the  canvas  centres 
very  palpably  upon  the  head  but,  while  he  some- 
times slighted  the  accessories  of  the  portraits  he 
painted,  there  is  sufficient  evidence  in  this  one  gal- 
lery of  the  Academy  to  prove  that  he  understood  to 
a remarkable  degree  the  painting  of  detail  and  of 
textures.  Biographers  are  fond  of  quoting  a bit  of 
repartee  that  he  threw  out  in  answer  to  a friend, 
who,  it  is  said,  took  him  to  task  for  his  indifference 
to  accessories  in  a portrait,  when  he  is  supposed  to 
have  arrogantly  said,  “ I copy  the  works  of  God 
and  leave  the  clothes  to  tailors  and  mantua  makers.” 
But  too  much  has  already  been  made  of  this  remark, 
which  was  never  meant  to  be  taken  seriously. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  have  the  record  of  his  most 
serious  conversations  with  Neagle  and  with  Jouett 
to  show  how  profoundly  he  had  studied  his  metier 
in  all  its  aspects.  On  the  subject  of  backgrounds  he 
said  to  the  latter  in  1816:  “Backgrounds  should 
contain  whatever  is  necessary  to  illustrate  the  char- 
acter of  the  person.  The  eye  should  see  the  appli- 
cation of  the  parts  to  the  whole,  but  without  sepa- 
rating or  attracting  the  attention  from  the  main 


Gilbert  Stuart 


93 


point.  Backgrounds  point  to  dates  and  circum- 
stances, and  peculiarity  of  employment  or  profes- 
sion, but  the  person  should  be  portrayed  so  as  to 
be  read,  like  the  Bible,  without  notes,  which  in  books 
are  likened  unto  backgrounds  in  paintings.  Too 
much  parade  in  the  background  is  like  notes  with 
a book  to  it,  and  is  very  apt  to  fatigue  by  the  con- 
stant shifting  of  attention.” 

As  a painter  of  men  of  vigorous  personality 
Stuart  stands  supreme.  Men  of  high  intellectual 
type  like  the  Provost  of  the  University  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, Bishop  White,  Robert  Morris,  William  Lewis 
or  Chief  Justice  Shippen,  all  of  whom  he  painted, 
inspired  his  art  to  its  utmost.  Of  this  type  the 
Academy  possesses  a superb  example  in  the  portrait 
of  Colonel  John  Nixon,  a prominent  patriot  and 
citizen  of  Philadelphia,  who  resided  there  from  the 
date  of  his  birth,  1733,  to  that  of  his  death,  1808, 
taking  during  his  entire  life  an  intense  interest  in 
the  welfare  of  his  city  and  in  the  politics  of  his 
country,  which  he  served  as  soldier  in  two  wars. 

Nixon’s  parents  were  Irish.  His  father  was  a 
shipping  merchant  who  in  1738  built  Nixon’s 
Wharf  on  the  Delaware  River.  The  son  succeeded 
to  the  business  of  the  father  and  in  1756,  during  the 
excitement  of  the  French  War,  was  elected  lieuten- 
ant of  the  Dock-Yard  company  of  which  his  father 
had  been  captain.  In  1765  he  signed  the  non-impor- 


94  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fftne  Brts 


tation  agreement  against  the  Stamp  Act  and  from 
that  time  forward  was  a leader  in  the  opposition  to 
the  usurpations  of  the  Crown. 

He  was  one  of  the  wardens  of  the  port  of  Phila- 
delphia in  1 766  and  in  May,  1776,  had  charge  of 
the  defences  of  the  Delaware,  at  Fort  Island,  and 
in  July  was  placed  in  command  of  the  guard  of  the 
city.  John  Nixon,  by  popular  appointment,  read 
and  proclaimed  to  the  people  publicly  and  for  the 
first  time,  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  at  the 
State  House,  on  Monday,  July  8,  1776.  He  was  one 
of  the  organizers  of  the  Bank  of  North  America  in 
1783  and  its  second  president  from  1792  until  his 
death. 

The  portrait  of  John  Nixon  is  a rare  piece  of 
character  study  and  is  equally  remarkable  for  the 
strength  and  virility  of  the  painting.  It  is  perhaps 
the  strongest  manifestation  of  the  truth  of  Stuart’s 
maxim,  “ There  are  no  lines  in  nature,”  as,  upon 
close  inspection,  the  markings,  particularly  in  the 
painting  of  the  mouth,  are  so  subtle,  so  apparently 
slight,  that  a metamorphosis  seems  to  occur  as  one 
backs  off  from  the  picture  and  the  strength  and  de- 
termination of  that  feature  become  the  dominating 
note  of  the  portrait.  But,  like  all  great  portraits,  it 
is  the  living  personality  of  the  sitter  which  holds  us 
more  than  the  technicalities  of  the  workmanship 
and  we  feel  Nixon  to  have  been  every  inch  a man. 


(Albert  Stuart 


95 


This  portrait  was  bequeathed  by  the  sitter’s  grand- 
son, Henry  Cramond,  in  1887. 

Of  the  personality  of  George  Reinold,  whose 
portrait  was  purchased  by  the  Academy  in  1898,  we 
know  nothing  except  that  he  was  a great  beau. 
Stuart’s  presentment  is  of  a very  handsome,  rather 
curious  looking  man  with  heavy  eyebrows  almost 
meeting  above  the  bridge  of  the  nose,  under  which 
black  eyes  flash  fire  and  make  the  strongest  interest 
of  the  face.  The  brow  is  low  and  contracted,  a de- 
fect which  is  partially  concealed  under  a wealth  of 
powdered  hair,  and  the  chin  is  buried  in  the  folds 
of  a snowy  neck-cloth  of  unusual  amplitude. 

One  of  the  most  interesting  of  the  Stuart  por- 
traits is  that  of  Colonel  Isaac  Franks,  an  aide-de- 
camp  to  General  Washington.  It  is  marked  by  a 
quiet  forceful  personality  and  is  a charming  por- 
trait of  a distinguished  man  of  Colonial  history. 
The  picture  came  as  the  bequest  of  Henry  C.  Gib- 
son, in  1896,  and  is  accompanied  by  an  autograph 
of  Stuart  affixed  to  the  following  inscription  in  the 
painter’s  own  hand : “ Portrait  of  Mr.  Isaac  Franks. 
Presented  to  my  friend  Isaac  Franks,  as  a token  of 
regard,  by  Gilbert  Stuart,  October  1,  1802,  German- 
town.” The  letter  was  presented  by  Mr.  Charles 
Henry  Hart,  to  whom  it  was  given  by  Mr.  Gibson. 

The  portrait  of  Sir  Henry  Lorraine  Baker,  an 
admiral  in  the  British  Navy,  was  painted  in  1817. 


96  pennsplpanta  Bca&emp  ot  fine  Brts 


The  order  which  he  wears  upon  his  breast  came  to 
light  in  the  process  of  cleaning  the  picture  .some 
years  ago,  having  supposedly  been  painted  out  by 
some  zealous  patriot  as  an  offence  to  his  republican 
principles.  Baker  was  with  Admiral  Cockburn  in 

1814  when  the  British  fleet  came  up  the  Chesapeake. 

The  portrait  of  James  Greenleaf,  one  of  the 

founders  of  the  North  American  Land  Company 
in  1795  and  painted  in  that  same  year,  is  of  about 
the  same  calibre  as  that  of  Alexander  James  Dallas, 
purchased  from  the  Annual  Members’  Fund  in  1900. 
Though  the  latter  portrait  is  not  in  so  good  a state 
of  preservation,  its  historic  significance  is  of  first 
importance.  Mr.  Dallas  took  up  his  residence  in 
Philadelphia  in  1783  where  he  was  admitted  to  the 
bar  in  1785.  He  served  his  country  as  Secretary  of 
State  under  John  Adams;  as  United  States  district 
attorney  for  Eastern  Pennsylvania  under  Jefferson; 
as  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  under  Madison ; and  in 

1815  discharged  the  duties  of  Secretary  of  War  in 
addition  to  directing  the  Treasury  Department  and 
superintending  the  reduction  of  the  army  upon  the 
restoration  of  peace.  Stuart’s  delineation  is  of  a 
man  of  upright  bearing,  of  great  enterprise  and 
alertness,  while  the  painting  is  of  that  most  virile 
epoch  of  the  painter’s  history.  The  canvas  comes 
through  the  descendants  of  Mr.  Dallas. 

Stuart’s  uncle,  Captain  Joseph  Anthony,  is  among 


PORTRAIT  OF  COLONEL  JOHN  NIXON.  PORTRAIT  OF  DR.  JOHN  FOTHERGILL. 

By  Gilbert  Stuart 


Gilbert  Stuart 


97 


the  more  recent  acquisitions  and  came  to  the  Acad- 
emy as  the  bequest  of  Professor  Oliver  Wolcott 
Gibbs.  It  has  been  badly  varnished  at  some  time, 
which  accounts  for  its  spotted  condition,  but  other- 
wise is  a valuable  addition  to  the  collection,  par- 
ticularly on  account  of  the  sitter’s  relationship  to 
the  artist. 

Of  his  English  period  the  Academy  owns  a fine 
example  in  the  portrait  of  Dr.  John  Fothergill,  a 
celebrated  English  physician  and  author,  which  was 
purchased  from  the  Annual  Members’  Fund  in  1903, 
and  is  the  last  canvas  to  be  added  to  the  collection. 
Fothergill  died  in  1780,  which  fixes  the  date  of  the 
portrait  within  five  years,  for  Stuart  went  to  Lon- 
don in  1775.  The  picture  has  lost  some  of  its  orig- 
inal vitality  in  the  hands  of  the  restorer,  but  is  still 
a superb  piece  of  work  and  most  valuable  as  repre- 
senting the  pearly  greys  of  the  painter’s  early 
manner  and  the  extreme  simplicity  of  his  method. 
The  eyes  are  subtly  done,  with  a few  deft  expressive 
touches,  the  neck-cloth  is  a marvel  of  professional 
skill  and  the  hand  fine  in  its  firmness  of  drawing  and 
simple  brushwork.  The  canvas  breathes  a dignity 
and  repose  which  were  doubtless  most  characteristic 
of  the  rather  prim  personage  depicted  — a primness 
that  was  an  official  manner,  if  one  may  judge  by 
the  keenly  humourous  eyes.  He  was  a charming  per- 
son evidently  and  one  that  interested  Stuart  keenly; 


98  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


for  the  details  of  the  costume,  the  curled  wig,  the 
texture  of  the  grey  cloth  coat,  the  design  of  its 
covered  buttons  and  the  pattern  of  the  handsome 
carved  leather  chair  in  which  he  sits  are  all  dwelt 
upon  with  the  care  of  a most  skilful  workman  who 
is  loath  to  leave  a congenial  occupation. 

Stuart’s  masterpieces  are  undoubtedly  to  be  found 
among  his  portraits  of  men.  In  the  delineation  of 
strong,  virile  types  he  was  at  his  most  original  and 
best.  So  much  more  fame  had  he  as  a painter  of 
men  that  it  is  with  a feeling  of  surprise  that  one 
turns  to  those  beautiful  portraits  of  women  of  which 
the  Academy  possesses  some  superb  examples  and 
which  reveal,  in  their  treatment,  an  unexpected  re- 
finement and  tenderness. 

The  portrait  sketch  of  Mrs.  Samuel  Blodgett, 
which  came  to  the  Academy  in  the  Carey  Collec- 
tion, is  universally  acknowledged  to  be  the  finest 
female  head  that  Stuart  produced.  The  sitter  was 
the  daughter  of  the  Reverend  William  Smith,  D.  D., 
provost  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania  — “ one 
of  the  most  admired  beauties  who  ever  adorned  the 
drawing-rooms  of  Philadelphia,  and  as  much  dis- 
tinguished by  sprightliness  and  wit  as  by  personal 
comeliness.” 

The  portrait  has  a purity,  an  ethereal  charm  and 
style  which  are  characteristic  of  the  painter’s  very 
best  period  — qualities  which  declined  in  his  work 


PORTRAIT  OF  MRS.  SAMUEL  BLODGETT.  PORTRAIT  OF  MISS  ELIZABETFI  BEALE  BORDLEY. 


Gilbert  Stuart 


99 


done  after  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
The  very  unfinished  nature  of  the  canvas  gives  it 
an  added  charm,  exemplifying,  as  it  does,  Stuart’s 
use  of  the  texture  of  the  canvas  in  his  portraits.  He 
rarely  obliterates  the  quality  of  the  surface  on 
which  he  paints,  and  so  important  a factor  was  this 
quality  to  the  painter  that  when  he  employed  a 
panel,  as  he  ofttimes  did  for  his  portraits,  he  had 
the  surface  prepared  or  grained  in  imitation  of  an 
English  twill  canvas,  a trick  that  has  aided  often 
in  the  identification  of  a disputed  work. 

The  Blodgett  portrait  expresses  all  the  charm  of 
the  sitter  with  the  least  detail  possible.  There  is  a 
subtlety  in  the  modelling  of  the  face  which  baffles  all 
imitation,  a richness,  a mellowness  of  flesh  that  is 
unsurpassed  if  not  unequalled  in  any  other  of  his 
heads.  The  strings  of  the  little  cap  or  turban,  which 
the  sitter  wears,  indicated  by  one  line  of  the  brush, 
terminate  in  a dainty  bow  of  transparent  muslin  to 
the  right  of  her  chin  and  are  a very  masterpiece  of 
restraint  in  the  painting  of  accessories.  The  por- 
trait has  been  engraved  by  John  Cheney  for  “ The 

Gift,”  1845. 

The  portrait  of  Miss  Elizabeth  Beale  Bordley  is 
a rare  combination  of  Stuart’s  English  and  Ameri- 
can qualities.  The  picture  is  especially  delightful 
in  its  decorative  quality,  in  the  delicacy  of  the  mod- 
elling, the  imperceptible  blending  of  one  form  into 


ioo  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


another  — through  all  of  which  the  charming  per- 
sonality of  the  sitter  dominates,  expresses  her  youth- 
ful frankness. 

The  sitter  was  born  in  Annapolis,  Maryland,  Oc- 
tober 17,  1777.  She  was  a daughter  of  John  Beale 
Bordley,  one  of  Washington’s  agricultural  corres- 
pondents and  friends.  She  came  to  Philadelphia 
with  her  parents  at  the  age  of  thirteen,  and  became 
a close  friend  of  Eleanor  Custis.  The  tradition  is 
that  the  two  friends  had  their  portraits  painted,  by 
Stuart,  for  each  other,  and  that  they  subsequently 
exchanged  them,  each  taking  her  own.  At  the  age 
of  forty,  Elizabeth  Bordley  married  James  Gibson, 
a Philadelphia  lawyer  of  distinction,  one  of  the 
founders  of  The  Pennsylvania  Academy,  and  she 
died  in  Philadelphia  at  the  advanced  age  of  eighty- 
five  years. 

The  picture  was  bequeathed  to  the  Academy  by 
Miss  Elizabeth  Mifflin  in  1886. 

The  portrait  of  Mrs.  Samuel  Gatliff  (Elizabeth 
Corbin  Griffin)  and  her  daughter  is  perhaps  the 
work  in  this  collection  which  most  recalls  the  painter 
Romney.  As  compared  with  the  portraits  of  Mrs. 
Blodgett  and  Elizabeth  Bordley  it  appears  fuller  in 
form,  brighter,  but  not  so  rare  in  colour,  and  more 
frankly  painted  though  it  lacks  the  mysterious 
charm  of  the  Blodgett  head.  Mr.  Hart  in  his 
series  — “ Gilbert  Stuart’s  Portraits  of  Women,” 


PORTRAIT  OF  MRS. 


SAMUEL  GATLIFF  AND  HER  DAUGHTER. 
By  Gilbert  Stuart. 


i 


(Btlbert  Stuart 


101 


published  in  the  Century  Magazine  for  March,  1899, 
says  of  this  picture : “ All  that  has  been  claimed  for 
Stuart’s  art  both  in  England  and  America  is  con- 
centrated in  this  picture  of  Mrs.  Gatliff  and  her 
child.  This  painting  possesses  every  quality  that 
goes  to  make  a great  picture.  Its  treatment  is  simple 
and  direct ; its  composition  is  dignified  and  natural ; 
its  colour  is  refined  and  true;  its  distinction  is  un- 
equivocal and  the  maternal  instinct  beams  from  the 
rapt  expression,  while  the  tender  firmness  of  the 
mother’s  clasped  hands  strikingly  contrasts  with  the 
trustful  restfulness  of  the  infant’s  pose.  Had  Gil- 
bert Stuart  painted  nothing  else  than  this  picture  it 
would  be  sufficient  to  name  him  a master  in  his  art.” 

The  picture  came  with  two  other  portraits  by 
Stuart  as  the  bequest  of  Dr.  Ferdinand  Stewart 
Campbell  in  1899.  One  of  these  represents  Mrs. 
Gatliff’ s father,  Colonel  Samuel  Griffin,  a colonel  in 
the  Army  of  the  Revolution  and  a member  of  the 
Congress  from  Virginia  in  1789.  The  second  de- 
picts Samuel  Gatliff,  an  English  merchant  in  Phila- 
delphia, to  whom  the  lady  of  the  first  portrait  was 
married  at  the  age  of  seventeen  years  and  by  whom 
she  was  left  a widow  with  four  daughters  ten  years 
later.  The  portraits  come  through  her  son  by  her 
second  marriage. 

The  portrait  of  Mrs.  George  Plumstead  is  char- 
acteristic of  the  painter’s  delicacy  of  brushwork  and 


102  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  fine  Brts 


fine  sentiment  in  the  delineation  of  women.  It 
hangs  pendant  to  Stuart's  portrait  of  George  Plum- 
stead,  the  two  having  been  painted  in  1800,  when 
Mrs.  Plumstead  was  twenty-four  and  her  husband 
eleven  years  her  senior.  Mrs.  Plumstead  had  a face 
more  remarkable  for  its  character  and  charm  of 
originality  than  for  mere  beauty.  She  affects  one  as 
essentially  Scottish  in  type,  with  light,  hazel  eyes 
and  fluffy  blond  hair,  elaborately  dressed.  She 
wears  black  velvet  softened  at  the  neck  by  trans- 
parent folds  of  white  tissue  and  lace,  which  Stuart 
was  so  fond  of  introducing  into  his  portraits,  and 
which  he  painted  with  consummate  skill.  A gold 
chain  further  relieves  and  breaks  up  the  blackness  of 
the  gown,  and  the  background  is  a crimson  curtain 
beyond  which  one  has  a glimpse  of  distant  sky. 

The  sitter  came  of  a staunch  patriotic  line*  her 
father  having  been  John  Ross,  of  Tain,  County 
Ross,  Scotland,  and  her  mother,  a daughter  of 
Charles  Cruikshank,  who  fought  under  Wolfe  at 
Quebec. 

George  Plumstead  was  the  youngest  son  of  Will- 
iam Plumstead,  a former  mayor  of  Philadelphia, 
whose  portrait  by  Copley  (?)  1 hangs  in  the  His- 
torical Society  of  Pennsylvania.  The  two  portraits 
were  bequeathed  to  the  Academy  by  a grand- 
daughter, Miss  Helena  Ross  Sheetz,  in  1891. 

1 Possibly  by  Matthew  Pratt. 


Gilbert  Stuart 


103 


Stuart  painted  the  daughters  of  Thomas  Willing 
and  the  Academy  owns  two,  those  of  Elizabeth  and 
Abigail.  Their  prominence  in  Philadelphia  society 
at  the  time  of  the  Revolution  and  early  days  of  the 
Republic  was* due  to  the  activity  of  their  father,  the 
head  of  the  mercantile  house  of  Willing  and 
Morris,  one  of  the  largest  in  the  country.  His 
partner  was  Robert  Morris,  the  financier  of  the 
Revolution. 

The  portrait  of  Elizabeth,  Mrs.  William  Jackson, 
belongs  to  about  the  same  class  and  has  much  of  the 
ethereal  charm  which  animates  the  portrait  of  Mrs. 
Blodgett.  There  is  exquisite  colour  in  the  painting 
of  the  chest  and  neck,  which  the  cut  of  the  bodice 
leaves  bare,  and  the  ruffles  and  transparent  muslin 
of  the  gown  show  masterly  handling  and  a fine 
sense  of  textures.  The  face  itself  is  very  grey, 
almost  unnaturally  so,  even  allowing  for  Stuart’s 
tendency  toward  greys  noticeable  in  his  early  man- 
ner. 

The  portrait  was  engraved  for  Griswold’s  “ Re- 
publican Court.”  It  was  bequeathed  to  the  Academy 
by  Miss  Ann  Willing  Jackson,  a daughter  of  the 
sitter,  in  1876. 

In  1887  Mrs.  John  W.  Field  presented  a por- 
trait of  her  mother,  Abigail  Willing,  Mrs.  Richard 
Peters,  Jr.,  by  Stuart,  and  that  of  her  father,  Rich- 
ard Peters,  Jr.,  by  Rembrandt  Peale,  came  to  the 


104  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


Academy  at  her  death  in  1902.  The  two  usually 
hang  together. 

The  portrait  of  Mrs.  James  Madison  is  full  of 
charm  and  individuality  and  is  a close  character 
study.  The  canvas  has  that  admirable  freshness 
and  spontaneity,  that  great  distinction  of  colour  and 
dainty  handling  of  white  draperies  typical  of  the 
painter’s  best  period.  There  are  evidences  of  some 
repainting  on  this  canvas,  notably  in  the  back- 
ground. 

Stuart’s  output  was  prodigious.  In  the  catalogue 
of  his  works,  issued  by  the  Museum  of  Fine  Arts, 
Boston,  in  1880,  there  are  seven  hundred  and  forty- 
six  portraits  recorded  including  sixty-one  of  Wash- 
ington. The  catalogue  of  the  Loan  Collection  of 
Portraits  held  at  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  in 
1887  speaks  of  the  discovery  of  eleven  more,  seven 
in  Philadelphia,  and  four  in  England.  Others  have 
been  discovered  since. 


CHAPTER  VI 


A GROUP  OF  EARLY  PORTRAIT  PAINTERS 

The  Academy  owns  twelve  portraits  by  Thomas 
Sully  (1783-1872),  upon  whom  fell  the  mantle  of 
Stuart,  at  that  artist’s  death  in  1828.  Sully  was 
born  in  Horncastle,  Lincolnshire,  England,  on 
June  19,  1783,  and  died  in  Philadelphia  Novem- 
ber 5,  1872,  at  the  advanced  age  of  eighty-nine 
years.  His  father  was  a player  who  brought  his 
family  to  this  country  at  the  beginning  of  the  last 
century,  landing  in  Charleston,  South  Carolina, 
where  the  son  gleaned  his  first  instruction  in  art. 
His  eldest  brother,  Lawrence,  Avas  settled  in  Rich- 
mond, as  a miniature  painter,  and  thither  Thomas 
repaired  for  advice  and  instruction.  Sully  re- 
moved to  New  York  in  1806,  and  three  years 
later  adopted  Philadelphia  as  his  permanent  home 
and  there  he  painted  his  most  important  pic- 
tures. 

Stuart  had  left  Philadelphia  in  1803,  and  Sully, 
at  the  instigation  of  Benjamin  Chew  Wilcocks, 
whose  portrait  he  had  painted  in  New  York,  vis- 


105 


106  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  ot  fine  Brts 


ited  Philadelphia  in  1807,  and  early  in  1808  took 
up  his  permanent  residence  there.  His  house  be- 
longed to  the  Girard  Estate  and  was  specially  built 
for  Mr.  Sully  by  Stephen  Girard,  who  leased  it 
to  him  for  life.  Its  site  was  the  bed  of  the  pres- 
ent Ranstead  Street  at  its  intersection  with  Fifth 
Street.  About  this  time  the  painter  made  a visit 
to  Boston  and  received  some  advice  from  Stuart, 
and  during  a year  spent  in  England  is  numbered  as 
one  of  the  pupils  of  Benjamin  West. 

Upon  his  return  to  Philadelphia  in  1809  or  1810, 
his  improvement  was  so  marked  that  he  became  at 
once  the  most  prominent  portrait  painter  in  Phil- 
adelphia, a position  he  never  had  to  relinquish,  and 
indeed  his  early  work  stamps  him  as  an  artist  of 
no  ordinary  merit. 

Like  some  other  great  artists  he  had  his  dis- 
tinctive periods  showing  clearly  defined  differ- 
ences in  manner  and  methods.  His  first  period 
was  characterized  by  strength  and  solidity  in  draw- 
ing, by  distinction  of  pose  and  beauty  of  colour, 
his  sitters  being  chiefly  men.  His  unquestioned 
masterpiece,  a full-length  portrait  of  General 
Jonathan  Williams,  was  painted  in  1815,  while 
his  excesptionally  fine  portraits  of  George  Fred- 
erick Cooke  and  James  Ross  were  painted  ear- 
lier. 

His  most  extraordinary  gift  to  posterity  is  a 


GEORGE  FREDERICK  COOKE  AS  RICHARD  III. 

By  Thomas  Sully. 


E $roup  of  Baris  portrait  painters  107 


register  1 of  his  work  kept  day  by  day,  in  which  he 
has  noted  the  name  of  the  subject,  the  size  of  the 
canvas,  the  date  when  each  picture  was  begun  and 
finished,  for  whom  painted  and  the  price.  At  the 
end  of  eath  year  he  added  up  the  total  number  of 
his  works  for  that  year  and  their  total  value;  and 
as  his  artistic  career  covered  a span  of  three  score 
years  and  ten,  he  has  recorded  the  painting  of  two 
thousand  five  hundred  and  twenty  pictures,  for 
which  he  received  $246,744,  or  an  annual  income 
averaging  $3525,  which  was  a very  comfortable 
revenue  for  the  greater  part  of  his  life,  at  the 
period  in  which  he  lived. 

The  Academy  is  fortunate  in  the  possession  of 
one  of  the  most  important  of  Sully’s  works,  the 
portrait  of  George  Frederick  Cooke  as  Richard 
III.  Cooke  was  an  eminent  actor  of  very  dissi- 

f 

pated  habits  who  came  to  this  country  in  1810  and 
died  in  New  York  two  years  later,  after  a period 
of  great  popularity.  The  full-length  portrait  in 
the  Academy’s  collection  is  a tour  de  force  rather 
than  a work  of  great  artistic  merit.  It  was  fin- 
ished in  January,  1812,  and  is  signed  with  Sully’s 
cipher,  “ T.  S.  1811,”  and  was  sold  to  The  Penn- 

1 This  register  arranged  and  edited  with  an  introduction  and 
notes  by  Mr.  Charles  Henry  Hart,  exists  in  an  edition  of  one 
hundred  and  ten  copies  published  at  Philadelphia  in  1909.  The 
original  manuscript  is  preserved  by  the  Historical  Society  of 
Pennsylvania. 


108  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  ffitte  Brts 


sylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts  for  $300.00, 
this  sum  having  been  contributed  by  friends  and 
admirers  of  the  actor.  While  the  accessories  of 
the  picture  are  cold  and  dry,  the  head  is  a distin- 
guished piece  of  painting. 

Sully’s  masterpiece  in  this  collection  is  his  half- 
length  portrait  of  James  Ross,  painted  in  1813,  a 
work  of  astonishing  virility  and  impressiveness. 
It  justifies,  as  comparatively  few  of  Sully’s  por- 
traits do  — none  other  in  this  collection  — the 
painter’s  renown  as  an  artist  de  premiere  quedite. 
The  canvas  is  an  imposing  one,  — the  splendid 
solidity  of  the  head,  the  breadth  of  treatment  and 
freshness  of  colour  quite  cast  into  the  shade  the 
remainder  of  the  collection. 

The  sitter,  James  Ross,  was  a lawyer,  a member 
of  the  Pennsylvania  Constitutional  Convention  of 
1790  and  United  States  Senator  from  1794  to  1803. 
The  picture  has  been  engraved  by  Goodman  and 
Piggott. 

The  portrait  of  John  McLain,  who  was  Post 
Master  General  of  the  United  States  in  1823,  and 
associate  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  from  1829  to  1861,  is  a fine  head, 
though  painted  much  later  — in  1831.  An  en- 
graving of  this  portrait  was  made  for  the  National 
Portrait  Gallery  by  W.  G.  Armstrong. 

Of  Sully’s  portraits  of  Fanny  Kemble,  the  pop- 


B Group  of  Barlp  portrait  painters  109 


ular  actress  and  authoress  of  his  day,  the  Academy 
owns  two,  “ Tragedy  ” and  “ Comedy,”  so  to 
speak.  The  better  known  of  the  two  portrays 
Mrs.  Kemble  in  the  character  of  Beatrice,  and 
pleases  by  its  vivacity  and  its  piquancy,  which  were 
so  characteristic  of  her  very  great  personal  charm. 
It  was  painted  in  1833  f°r  Edward  L.  Carey  and 
came  to  the  Academy  with  the  Carey  Collection. 
It  was  engraved  by  John  Cheney  for  “ The  Gift  ” 
in  1836. 

There  is  in  the  Board  Room  of  the  Academy, 
Sully’s  portrait  of  Edward  L.  Carey,  the  owner  of 
the  Carey  Collection  and  the  fourth  president  of 
the  Academy,  which  office  he  held  until  his  death, 
and  one  of  the  earliest  collectors  of  paintings  in 
this  country. 

In  1837  Sully  visited  London  and  painted  from 
life  the  portrait  of  Queen  Victoria  in  her  corona- 
tion robes  for  the  St.  George  Society.  It  hangs 
in  the  hall  of  the  St.  George  Society,  Philadelphia. 

John  Wesley  Jarvis  (1780-1839)  chiefly  in- 
teresting to  us  as  the  master  of  that  greater 
painter,  Henry  Inman,  is  represented  in  the  Acad- 
emy by  one  portrait,  that  of  William  Harris  Craw- 
ford, the  American  statesman,  who  filled  many 
positions  of  trust  and  honour  until  finally  he  be- 
came secretary  of  the  Treasury  of  the  United 
States  in  1816. 


no  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  ffine  Hrts 


Jarvis  was  a nephew  of  John  Wesley,  born  in 
England  and  brought  to  Philadelphia  by  his  father 
when  he  was  but  five  years  of  age. 

It  is  said  that  a visit  to  the  studio  of  John  Wesley 
Jarvis  decided  the  career  of  Henry  Inman  (1801- 
1846),  who  became  Jarvis’  .pupil,  serving  a seven 
years’  apprenticeship  and  devoting  himself  at  first 
to  miniature  painting  in  which  he  became  very 
proficient.  Inman  was  a native  of  Utica,  New 
York,  though  he  spent  much  of  his  life  in  New 
York  City,  where  he  was  one  of  the  founders  and 
the  first  vice-president  of  the  National  Academy 
of  Design,  in  1824-25. 

His  connection  with  Philadelphia  is  from  1832 
to  about  1835,  when  he  was  associated  with  Cephas 
G.  Childs  in  a lithographing  printing  business  car- 
ried on  in  that  city.  He  was  a director  of  The 
Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts  from  1834 
to  1836.  His  portraits  of  Macaulay,1  Chalmers, 
and  Wordsworth  were  commissions  from  this 
country  and  were  painted  in  England,  whither 
Inman  went  on  a visit  in  1845  and  remained  about 
a year. 

The  finest  Inman  owned  by  the  Academy  is  his 
portrait  of  Henry  Pratt,  presented  by  Mrs.  J. 
Dundas  Lippincott  in  1905.  Henry  Pratt’s  place 
in  a gallery  of  Philadelphia  portraits  is  particu- 


1In  the  Academy  Collection. 


PORTRAIT  OF  JAMES  ROSS.  PORTRAIT  OF  PIENRY  PRATT. 

By  Thomas  Sully.  By  Henry  Inman. 


B (3roup  o t Earls  portrait  painters  ill 


larly  significant.  He  was  the  eldest  son  of  Mat- 
thew Pratt,  the  portrait  painter,  and  became  emi- 
nent as  a shipping  merchant  of  the  firm  of  Pratt 
and  Kintzing.  He  purchased  from  Robert  Morris 
a large  estate  on  the  banks  of  the  Schuylkill  known 
as  “ Lemon  Hill,”  which  at  his  death  became  the 
nucleus  of  Fairmount  Park,  having  been  saved 
from  its  intended  fate  of  a factory  site  through 
the  energy  of  Thomas  Pym  -Cope. 

The  old  Pratt  mansion  still  stands,  though  de- 
generated into  the  uses  of  a public  refreshment 
house,  within  the  boundary  of  the  East  Park.  Mr. 
Pratt  was  one  of  the  founders  of  the  Academy  — 
he  was  born  in  Philadelphia  in  1761  and  died  there 
in  1838. 

The  picture  represents  a remarkably  handsome 
elderly  gentleman  in  the  full  vigour  of  his  age,  in 
• which  Inman  has  seen  and  painted  all  the  beauty. 
He  has  placed  the  subject  in  a flood  of  mellow  light 
which  enhances  the  value  of  his  silky,  white  hair 
and  the  soft  texture  of  his  fine  old  skin.  The 
delightful  personality  of  the  sitter  dominates  the 
mere  painting,  in  itself  most  charming.  The  back- 
ground is  admirable,  showing  to  the  right  a bit  of 
handsome  landscape.  It  is  Inman  at  his  best  and 
rarest. 

The  portraits  of  David  Paul  Brown,  a noted 
lawyer  of  Philadelphia,  and  of  Caleb  Cope,  sev- 


112  Pennsylvania  Hca&emy  of  fine  arts 


enth  president  of  the  Academy,  express  Inman’s 
more  conventional,  less  inspired  style  but  are  thor- 
oughly representative  and  distinguished  portraits 
in  which  Inman  is  seen  in  his  full  power. 

His  portrait  of  Thomas  Sully  as  an  old  man  is 
in  one  of  his  most  sympathetic  moods  and  is  the 
best  representation  we  have  of  the  physiognomy  of 
that  artist.  The  canvas  is  painted  with  great  ten- 
derness and  feeling  and  is  charming  in  its  treat- 
ment and  sentiment.  The  little  portrait  of  Inman 
by  himself,  on  a canvas  ten  by  twelve  inches,  is  a 
delightful  sketch  with  an  old  style  quaintness  in- 
duced by  the  hat  which  he  wears.  It  is  signed  on 
the  back  “ Sketch  of  H.  Inman  by  himself  at 
thirty-three,  June,  1834,”  and  was  bequeathed 
in  1871  by  Cephas  G.  Childs,  his  business  part- 
ner. 

Another  of  the  illustrious  coterie  of  early  por- 
trait painters  allied  with  the  history  of  Philadel- 
phia is  John  Neagle  (1796-1865)  who  is  repre- 
sented in  the  collections  of  the  Academy  by  four 
important  canvases.  Of  these,  the  best  known  is 
that  of  “ Pat  Lyon  at  the  Forge.”  The  original 
of  this  picture,  painted  in  1826  when  the  artist  was 
twenty-nine  years  of  age  and  exhibited  in  the 
Academy  the  following  year,  is  now  the  property 
of  the  Boston  Museum  of  Fine  Arts.  The  Acad- 
emy’s canvas  is  an  enlarged  replica  painted  in  1829 


PAT  LYON  AT  THE  FORGE. 
By  John  Neagle. 


B (Broup  of  Earls  portrait  painters  113 


and  has  been  engraved  with  the  title  the  “ Village 
Blacksmith.” 

The  subject,  Pat  Lyon,  the  jolly  smith,  was  an 
eccentric  character,  well  known  in  Philadelphia. 
He  had  acquired  by  his  industry  a considerable 
fortune  and  had  forsworn  the  forge  when  he 
called  upon  Neagle  to  paint  his  portrait,  but  he 
was  no  snob,  and  specified  particularly  in  his  con- 
versation with  the  painter  that  it  was  in  his  old 
character  as  blacksmith  that  he  wished  to  go  down 
to  posterity  and  not  as  a “ gentleman,”  a role  for 
which  he  seems  to  have  had  some  contempt. 
“ Paint  me  as  a blacksmith,”  said  the  wealthy  Vul- 
can, stripping  off  his  fine  coat  and  baring  his  pon- 
derous arms.  Shortly  before,  the  quaker  burghers, 
astutely  arguing  that  the  maker  of  locks  was  the 
man  who  could  pick  them,  had  apprehended  Pat 
for  a bank  robbery  and  clapped  him  into  the  prison 
at  Sixth  and  Walnut  Streets,  doubtless  behind  a 
lock  of  his  own  construction.  Lyon  was  heartily 
proud  of  his  martyrdom  and  desired  that  a view 
of  his  Bastile  should  figure  in  the  portrait,  which 
identifies  the  dark  tower  frowning  through  the 
window  of  the  forge  in  Neagle’s  picture.  Lyon 
sued  the  bank  and  recovered  $12,000  damages  for 
the  indignity  he  suffered.  He  died  in  Philadelphia 
April  15,  1829.  The  picture  was  presented  to  the 
Academy  by  the  Neagle  family. 


114  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  ot  ffine  Hrts 


The  original  sketch  for  this  picture,  on  a canvas 
eight  by  ten  inches,  was  presented  to  the  institu- 
tion by  the  late  John  Lambert,  Jr.,  in  1897,  and 
usually  hangs  by  the  side  of  the  large  canvas.  It 
is  a charming  little  sketch  giving  a complete  idea 
of  the  character  of  the  blacksmith  and  of  the  col- 
our scheme,  which  is  more  attractive  in  this  sketch 
than  in  the  completed  picture.  This  interesting 
relic  is  inscribed  on  the  back : “ The  original  study 
in  colours  by  John  Neagle  for  Pat  Lyon  the  black- 
smith. A rapid  sketch  for  arrangement  and  gen- 
eral effect,  Philada.  Penna.”  and  beneath  this  is 
written,  “ The  above  is  my  father’s  handwriting, 
Garrett  C.  Neagle,  January  23rd,  ’97.”  Mr.  Lam- 
bert evidently  had  Mr.  Neagle’s  son  make  this 
identification  before  presenting  the  sketch  to  the 
Academy. 

John  Neagle’s  parents  were  Philadelphians, 
though  he  was  born  in  Boston  in  1796  during  a 
visit  they  made  to  that  city.  He  had  no  regular 
instruction,  though  conscientious  biographers  re- 
cord his  infant  acquaintance  with  Petticolas,  the 
miniature  painter,  when  both  were  school  boys  and 
that  after  some  instruction  in  drawing  from  Peter 
Ancora  he  was  apprenticed  to  an  ornamental  coach 
maker  and  got  two  months’  instruction  from  Bass 
Otis.  It  was  during  this  period  of  his  study,  when 
Neagle  was  nineteen  years  old,  that  Otis  made  that 


B Group  of  Baris  portrait  painters  115 


delightful  portrait  of  his  pupil  which  hangs  in  the 
Academy. 

In  1818  Neagle  set  out  for  London  in  quest  of 
Benjamin  West,  thinking  he  would  find  a more 
open  field  but  shortly  returned  to  Philadelphia  and 
in  May,  1820,  married  a step-daughter  and  niece 
of  Thomas  Sully,  from  whom  he  received  some 
instruction  and  warm  encouragement.  Later  he 
spent  some  time  with  Stuart  in  Boston  painting  his 
two  portraits  of  the  venerable  artist  shortly  before 
his  death  and  profiting  exceedingly  by  his  instruc- 
tion and  advice. 

After  this  Neagle  won  rapid  distinction  in  his 
profession.  He  began  painting  portraits  about 
1818  in  Lexington,  Kentucky,  and  made  a little 
tour  of  Frankfort,  Louisville,  and  New  Orleans 
before  settling  in  Philadelphia,  where  the  best  years 
of  his  professional  life  were  spent.  He  was  a 
director  of  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the 
Fine  Arts  in  1830-31  and  one  of  the  founders 
of  the  Artists’  Fund  Society  and  its  first  president, 
1835-44.  He  died  in  Philadelphia  September  17, 
1865. 

Neagle’s  work  is  very  personal,  but  little  affected 
by  the  painting  of  those  artists  with  whom  he  came 
briefly  in  contact.  The  Academy’s  masterpiece  is 
the  noble  and  beautiful  portrait  of  Clayton  Earl, 
signed  and  dated  on  the  front  J.  Neagle,  1832. 


116  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  fine  Brts 


The  canvas  is  a very  fine  example  of  solidity  in 
painting,  of  firmness  of  construction,  of  character 
rendering  and  shows  Neagle  to  have  been  a 
draughtsman  of  unusual  attainments. 

While  this  portrait  and  that  of  Cornelia  Earl, 
wife  of  the  above,  both  bequeathed  by  their  de- 
scendant, Harrison  Earl  in  1894,  show  Neagle  to 
have  been  a painter  of  strength,  delicacy  and  re- 
finement, he  may  be  studied  in  his  more  virile 
aspects  in  Philadelphia  at  St.  George’s  Hall,  where 
hangs  the  noble  and  massive  portrait  of  Dr.  Joseph 
Tilmore,  that  distinguished  Englishman  who  was 
for  many  years  rector  of  St.  Paul’s  Church,  Phila- 
delphia; in  the  Union  League,  which  owns  his 
full-length  portrait  of  Henry  Clay;  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Pennsylvania,  which  contains  five  of  his 
best  portraits,  or  in  the  excellent  “ Dr.  Thomas 
Parke  ” possessed  by  the  Philadelphia  Library- 
Company. 

Of  the  work  of  Bass  Otis  (1784-1861),  Neagle’s 
alleged  master,  the  Academy  possesses  little  of  im- 
portance, though  he  settled  in  Philadelphia  as  a 
portrait  painter  in  1812.  His  large  picture  and 
only  known  composition,  entitled  “ Interior  of  an 
Iron  Foundry,”  before  referred  to,  was  presented 
to  the  Academy  by  the  artist. 

Otis  achieved  a measure  of  success  as  a portrait 
painter  and  did  a good  deal  of  experimenting  in 


PORTRAIT  OF  CLAYTON  EARL. 
By  John  Neagle. 


B Group  of  JEaxly  portrait  painters  117 


the  allied  arts  and  is  said  to  have  made  and  printed 
the  first  lithograph  produced  in  America.1 

He  invented  the  perspective  protractor  and  re- 
produced in  a small  crude  mezzotint  his  portrait  of 
Dr.  Physick. 

The  Academy  owns  a delightful  portrait  of  John 
Neagle,  by  Bass  Otis,  painted  in  1815  when  Neagle 
at  the  age  of  nineteen  worked  in  his  atelier.  It  is  a 
fresh,  young  face  which  looks  out  over  a high,  fop- 
pish stock,  full  of  courage  and  determination.  The 
portrait  was  presented  to  the  Academy  by  the 
Neagle  family.  Included  in  the  Academy’s  col- 
lection are  also  portraits  of  Alexander  Lawson, 
the  engraver,  and  of  Pollard  E.  Birckhead. 

The  Academy  possesses  one  example  of  the 
genius  of  Kentucky’s  master  painter,  Matthew 
Harris  Jouett  (1788-1827)  of  whom  practically 
nothing  was  known  in  these  parts  until  his  exist- 
ence was  brought  to  light  at  the  time  of  the  Colum- 
bian Exposition  in  1893. 

It  was  in  this  wise.  The  formation  of  a collec- 
tion that  would  show  the  progress  and  develop- 
ment of  the  country  from  Colonial  times  was  in- 
trusted to  Mr.  Charles  Henry  Hart  and  the  first 
contribution  received  by  him  was  a miniature  on 
ivory  from  Frankfort,  Kentucky.  The  miniature, 
while  it  defied  every  one  of  the  canons  of  that  art, 

1 Reproduced  in  the  Analectic  Magazine , July,  1819. 


118  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  of  fine  Hrts 


was  so  undoubted  a work  of  art  in  the  freer  sense 
that  it  was  at  once  accepted,  upon  which  the  grand- 
son of  the  painter,  the  late  Jouett  Menefee,  offered 
a second  work  by  his  grandfather  which  was  none 
other  than  the  excellent  portrait  of  John  Grimes 
now  in  the  possession  of  the  Metropolitan  Museum 
of  Xew  York. 

Matthew  Harris  Jouett  was  born  in  what  is  now 
Harrodsburg,  in  Mercer  County,  Kentucky,  on 
April  22nd,  1788,  and  died  in  his  fortieth  year  at 
Lexington,  August  10th,  1827.  He  was  of  French 
Huguenot  origin,  being  a direct  descendant  from 
the  noble  Matthieu  de  Jouet,  master  of  the  Horse 
to  Louis  XIII  of  France,  Lord  of  Leveignac,  and 
Lieutenant  in  the  Marshalsea  of  Limousin,  whose 
grandson,  Daniel  de  Jouet  came  to  Xarragansett 
Country  in  Rhode  Island  in  1686. 

Matthew  Jouett  was  educated  for  the  law  and 
admitted  to  the  bar.  He  was  appointed  first  lieu- 
tenant in  the  Twenty-eighth  Regiment  of  the 
L’nited  States  Infantry  when  the  war  against 
England  broke  out. 

He  figures  as  an  independent  in  the  field  of 
American  Art,  though  he  came  under  the  patronage 
and  care  of  Gilbert  Stuart  during  a brief  four 
months  of  his  life.  As  a souvenir  of  this  time  he 
has  left  us  notes  of  Stuart’s  conversations  in  the 
painting  room  given  in  Stuart’s  own  language,  to 


B Group  of  )Earl£  portrait  painters  119 

“ preserve  his  singular  facility  in  conversation  and 
powers  of  illustration.” 

That  Jouett  followed  Stuart’s  methods  in  com- 
mencing a portrait  is  evident  in  the  last  canvas 
upon  which  he  worked,  an  interesting  ebauche  of 
the  local  poet,  Peter  Grayson,  which  was  presented 
to  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts 
by  the  painter’s  daughter,  Mrs.  Menefee  of  Louis- 
ville, Kentucky.  The  story  is  told  how  Grayson 
was  on  his  way  to  pose  for  this  portrait  when  he 
met  a funeral  procession  and  upon  inquiry  learned 
that  it  was  his  friend  Jouett  the  painter  who  was 
being  carried  to  his  grave.  To  commemorate  this 
sad  event  Grayson  wrote  a poem  which  has  been 
published. 

Stuart’s  dictum  as  preserved  by  Jouett  was : 
“ In  the  commencement  of  all  portraits  the  first 
idea  is  an  indistinct  mass  of  light  and  shadow;  or 
the  character  of  the  person  as  seen  in  the  hill  of 
the  evening,  in  the  grey  of  the  morning  or  at  a 
distance  too  great  to  discriminate  features  with 
exactness.  Too  much  light  destroys  as  too  little 
hides  the  colours  and  the  true  and  perfect  image 
of  a man  is  to  be  seen  only  in  a misty  or  hazy 
atmosphere. 

“ Jouett  was  in  his  every  fibre  and  vibration  an 
artist  in  the  highest  sense.  He  was  a skilled  ana- 
lyst and  a profound  synthesist.  He  separated  the 


120  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


dominant  traits  of  his  sitters  and  then  combined 
them  to  bring  out  the  strong  points  and  make  his 
portraits  likenesses.  Considering  Jouett’s  environ- 
ment and  lack  of  opportunity  it  is  not  extravagant 
to  say  that  his  work  borders  on  the  marvellous 
and  it  becomes  difficult  to  believe  that  good  exam- 
ples of  some  of  the  great  masters  of  the  brush  were 
not  known  to  him  in  his  Kentucky  home.”  1 

In  the  historical  sequence  of  the  art  of  Penn- 
sylvania comes  Jacob  Eichholtz  (1776-1842),  a 
native  of  Lancaster.  He  was  apprenticed  to  a 
copper-smith  and  studied  with  a sign-painter  in 
his  native  town,  and  after  acquiring  a certain  pro- 
ficiency in  his  art  visited  and  copied  Stuart  and  is 
also  said  to  have  received  some  advice  from  Sully. 

Nearly  every  old  family  in  Lancaster  or  Lancas- 
ter County  points  with  pride  to  ancestral  portraits 
done  by  this  native  artist,  who  enjoyed,  it  appears, 
a full  measure  of  local  celebrity.  Of  his  brush  the 
Academy  possesses  but  two  examples  the  better 
one  being  a portrait  of  the  Reverend  John  Gottlieb 
Ernestus  Heckewelder,  a Moravian  Missionary 
(1743-1832).  The  canvas  is  signed  “ E.  1823” 
on  the  face,  while  from  an  elaborate  inscription  let- 
tered on  the  back  we  learn  that  it  was  painted  in 
August,  1822,  at  Bethlehem,  Pennsylvania.  It  de- 

1 Kentucky’s  master  painter.  By  Charles  Henry  Hart.  Har- 
per’s Monthly  Magazine , May,  1899. 


B Group  of  Earls  portrait  painters  121 


picts  a dry,  uncompromising  devotee  of  the  austere 
faith  of  the  Moravians  and  appears  to  be  an  excel- 
lent character  study. 

His  manner  of  painting  at  this  time  exhibits 
marked  individuality  and  is  easily  recognized.  He 
followed  a certain  dry  statistical  formula  in  which 
an  insistent  light  red  outline  plays  a prominent  part 
and  makes  an  ugly  note  of  colour. 

In  1825,  when  he  painted  the  portrait  of  Susan 
Earl  Miller,  bequeathed  by  Harrison  Earl  in  1894, 
he  seemed  to  have  outgrown  his  former  manner 
to  such  an  extent  that  it  is  inconceivable  that  the 
two  portraits  are  by  the  same  hand.  The  first  can- 
vas was  presented  by  the  late  William  L.  Elkins  in 

1893- 

His  best  known  portrait  is  that  of  Nicholas 
Biddle  with  the  United  States  Bank  in  the  back- 
ground which  he  was  said  to  have  taken  as  a speci- 
men of  his  work  to  show  Stuart  when  he  visited 
him  in  Boston.  He  spent  ten  years  in  Philadelphia 
painting  portraits. 


CHAPTER  VII 


THE  PORTRAIT  GALLERY  COMPLETED 

An  interesting  picture  from  the  historical  stand- 
point is  that  of  “ Joseph  Wright  and  Family/’ 
painted  by  the  artist.  Rather  charming  it  is  in 
its  old-school  style.  The  canvas  is  thirty-two  by 
thirty-eight  inches  and  the  figures,  all  full  lengths, 
are  therefore  about  half-life  size.  The  wife  is 
seated  on  the  left  with  a child  on  her  lap,  a small 
boy  leaning  against  her  knee,  and  a little  girl  seated 
at  her  feet.  The  artist  stands  on  the  right,  with 
his  hat  on. 

Joseph  Wright  (1756-1793)  was  a son  of  Pa- 
tience Lovell  Wright,  that  extraordinary  woman 
who  achieved  fame  as  a modeller  in  wax.  He  was 
bom  in  Philadelphia  and  after  the  death  of  his 
father  accompanied  his  mother  and  her  family  to 
London,  where  her  own  efforts  and  talents  were 
sufficiently  rewarded  to  enable  her  to  give  her  son 
a good  education.  He  studied  with  West  and  John 
Hoppner,  who  married  his  sister,  and  before  leav- 
ing London  painted  a portrait  of  the  Prince  of 
Wales,  afterward  George  IV. 

122 


Ube  portrait  Gallery  Completed  123 


Returning  to  this  country  in  1782,  he  was  ap- 
pointed by  Washington  the  first  die-sinker  of  the 
United  States  Mint,  and  the  “ Manly  Medal  ” of 
Washington  is  supposed  to  be  his  work.  He  died 
shortly  after  his  appointment,  in  1793,  of  the  yel- 
low fever  epidemic,  in  Philadelphia. 

Charles  Robert  Leslie  (1794-1859)  is  repre- 
sented in  the  Academy  by  eleven  works  of  vary- 
ing importance,  including  his  first  notable  com- 
position, “ The  Murder  of  Rutland,  by  Clifford,” 
which  was  presented  to  the  Academy  in  1831,  by 
members  of  the  artist’s  family. 

This  large  and  dramatic  canvas  illustrates  a pas- 
sage from  Shakespeare’s  “ Henry  VI ; ” where  Ed- 
mund, Earl  of  Rutland,  having  been  pursued  to  the 
field  of  battle  between  Sandal  Castle  and  Wake- 
field by  Lord  Clifford  intent  upon  avenging  the 
death  of  his  father,  who  was  slain  by  the  father 
of  the  young  duke,  falls  upon  his  knees  before  the 
bloody  Clifford  and  exclaims: 

“ O,  let  me  pray,  before  I take  my  death  — 

To  thee  I pray;  sweet  Clifford,  pity  me! 

Clifford.  Such  pity  as  my  rapier’s  point  affords.” 
Third  Part)  Henry  VI.  Act  1,  Scene  Hi. 

The  scene  is  one  of  great  dramatic  intensity. 
The  murderous  Lord,  clad  from  head  to  foot  in  a 
coat  of  plate-armour,  occupies  the  centre  of  the 
canvas.  His  face,  hideously  distorted  by  his  evil 


124  ©ennsgivania  Bcafcemg  of  fine  Brts 


intent,  is  disclosed  by  the  lifted  vizor,  and  he 
speaks  his  cruel  line  through  clenched  teeth,  his 
eyes  glaring  horribly.  One  hand  lifts  the  rapier, 
while  with  the  other  he  seizes  the  fair  hair  of  the 
boy.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Sir  Edwin  Land- 
seer, when  a boy,  stood  for  the  figure  of  Rutland. 
In  the  background,  the  frenzied  tutor  is  disappear- 
ing, dragged  off  by  soldiers. 

The  canvas  presents  some  immature  crudities, 
but  the  delicate  beauty  of  the  child  is  expressed 
in  a sympathetic  manner  in  contrast  to  his  rough 
and  brutal  surroundings. 

Leslie  is  essentially  at  home  on  the  walls  of  the 
Academy,  for  he  was  in  a sense  its  first  scholarship 
student.  His  history  is  interesting.  His  parents 
were  Americans,  though  he  was  bom  in  London 
in  1794,  whence  he  was  brought,  in  1800,  to  Phil- 
adelphia, where,  at  the  proper  age,  he  was  appren- 
ticed to  a firm  of  booksellers  — Bradford  and 
Inskeep.  His  taste  for  art  developed  early,  as 
evinced  in  three  water  colour  sketches  of  noted 
actors  in  character,  owned  by  the  Academy. 

His  boyish  enthusiasm  had  been  stirred  to  the 
depths  by  the  acting  of  George  Frederick  Cooke. 
He  had  seen  the  theatre  steps  covered  on  a Sunday 
night,  with  servants  and  porters,  who  waited  the 
opening  of  the  box  offices,  next  day. 

The  magnetism  of  a furore  so  universal  pos- 


THE  MURDER  OF  RUTLAND,  BY  CLIFFORD. 
By  Charles  Robert  Leslie. 


Zbc  portrait  (Sailers  Complete*)  125 


sessed  him  completely  and  found  vent  in  his  pencils, 
while  it  prepared  him  an  audience  exceptionally 
prepossessed  to  admire  his  works.  The  aquarelles 
in  question  represent  Cooke,  Cooper  and  Warren 
in  their  most  striking  poses  as  Othello,  Falstaff 
and  Richard  and  are  odd  memoranda  of  the  stage 
costume  and  strut  of  that  time. 

Mr.  Bradford,  of  the  firm  of  booksellers  to  which 
Leslie  was  attached,  was  at  this  time  a director  of 
the  Academy  and  at  a special  meeting  of  the  Board 
held  May  20,  1811,  he  exhibited  these  specimens  of 
the  work  of  his  sixteen  year  old  apprentice,  which 
had  a great  success.  His  masters  volunteered  to 
forego  five  unexpired  years  of  his  time  and  one 
of  them,  Mr.  Inskeep,  accompanied  him  to  Eng- 
land, where  he  entered  upon  that  cheery  and  charm- 
ing career  which  closed  all  too  soon. 

The  Academy  contributed  to  his  outfit  one  hun- 
dred dollars  and  the  following  resolution  does 
credit  to  the  hearts  of  the  gentlemen  of  the  Board : 
“Resolved,  That  Master  Leslie  be  an  eleve  of  this 
Academy,  and  that  we  will  afford  all  the  facilities 
in  our  power  toward  forwarding  the  views  of  his 
friends,  in  giving  him  an  education  calculated  to 
call  forth  the  powers  of  his  mind,  and  raise  him 
to  that  rank  among  artists  to  which  we  are  in- 
formed he  ardently  aspires,  and  to  which,  in  our 
opinion,  he  must  attain  should  a munificent  pat- 


126  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  jFine  Efts 

ronage  foster  and  protect  the  laudable  ambition 
which  at  present  stimulates  his  genius  to  exertion 
so  extraordinary.” 

Leslie  arrived  in  London,  December,  1811, 
studied  at  the  Royal  Academy  and  with  West  and 
Allston;  established  his  reputation  as  a painter  in 
the  higher  genre  style,  by  his  first  important  pic- 
ture “ Sir  Roger  de  Coverly  going  to  Church,” 
which  was  painted  for  Mr.  Dunlop  and  repeated 
for  the  Marquis  of  Lansdowne.  He  exhibited  in 
1821  his  “ May  Day  in  the  Reign  of  Queen  Eliza- 
beth,” which  secured  his  election  as  an  associate  of 
the  Royal  Academy,  and  in  1826  he  was  made  a full 
Academician. 

Leslie  was  professor  of  drawing  at  the  United 
States  Military  Academy  at  West  Point  in  1833 
and  professor  of  painting  in  the  Royal  Academy 
from  1848  to  1851.  The  National  Gallery,  Lon- 
don, has  two  of  his  pictures,  “ Sancho  Panza 
and  the  Duchess”  and  “Uncle  Toby  at  the  Win- 
dow.” 

The  Academy’s  collection  of  his  works  includes, 
beside  those  already  mentioned,  three  cabinet  pic- 
tures, received  with  a portrait  of  Henry  C.  Carey, 
in  the  Carey  Collection,  Mr.  Carey  having  married 
Leslie’s  sister.  These  are  “ Gypsy  Belle,”  a por- 
trait of  Charlotte  Cooper,  Queen  of  the  English 
Gypsies ; “ Touchstone,  Audrey  and  William,  in 


THE  RIGHT  HONOURABLE  WILLIAM  EWART  GLADSTONE  AT 
DOWNING  STREET. 

By  John  McLure  Hamilton. 


Vbe  portrait  (Sailers  Completed  127 


As  You  Like  It  ” and  “ Olivia,  in  Twelfth  Night.” 
An  ideal  head  of  “ Sophia  Western,”  the  heroine 
of  the  novel  entitled,  “ Tom  Jones,”  by  Henry 
Fielding,  was  presented  by  Samuel  P.  Avery,  from 
whom  came  also  the  interesting  little  portrait  of 
the  Earl  of  Egremont,  a friend  and  patron  of 
Leslie. 

Leslie’s  contribution  to  the  Gallery  of  National 
Portraiture  is  a portrait  of  William  Dillwyn,  a 
Philadelphia  minister  in  the  Society  of  Friends, 
bequeathed  by  W.  S.  Warder  in  1832. 

With  this  the  portrait  collection  comes  rapidly 
down  to  modern  times.  Some  minor  works  by 
minor  painters  complete  the  category  of  early  por- 
trait painters.  James  Read  Lambdin  (1807-1889), 
a pupil  of  Sully,  is  represented  by  several  portraits, 
including  one  of  himself.  Samuel  B.  Waugh 
(1814-1885)  painted  two  of  the  collection  of  early 
presidents  of  the  Academy,  Henry  D.  Gilpin  and 
Joseph  R.  Ingersoll.  William  Henry  Furness 
(1828-1867)  was  the  author  of  the  unfinished  por- 
trait of  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson,  presented  by  his 
brother,  Horace  Howard  Furness,  in  1900. 

The  singularly  brutal  portrait  of  this  distin- 
guished Shakespearian  scholar  in  a red  robe,  is 
from  the  brush  of  Joseph  de  Camp,  a Boston 
artist  and  one  of  the  Ten  American  Painters.  It 
is  as  unsympathetic  a rendering  of  one  of  Phila- 


128  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  JFine  Brts 


delphia’s  most  charming  citizens  as  one  could  hope 
to  find. 

In  striking  contrast  to  De  Camp’s  portrait  of  Dr. 
Furness  are  John  McLure  Hamilton’s  (1853-  ) 

portraits  of  Gladstone  and  Richard  Vaux,  both  of 
distinguished  old  gentlemen,  done  with  infinite 
tenderness  and  appreciation. 

Mr.  Hamilton  is  a Philadelphian  but  has  resided 
some  thirty  years  in  London.  He  made  two  por- 
traits of  the  Right  Honourable  William  Ewart 
Gladstone.  The  one  known  as  “ Gladstone  at 
Hawarden  ” was  purchased  by  the  French  Govern- 
ment for  the  Luxembourg  Museum,  while  the  sec- 
ond, “ Gladstone  at  Downing  Street,”  was  pur- 
chased by  the  Gilpin  Fund  from  the  sixty-third 
annual  exhibition  of  the  Academy  in  1894. 

This  canvas  represents  the  “ grand  old  man  ” 
at  home,  reading  in  his  library  at  Downing  Street, 
through  whose  window  may  be  distinguished  the 
Nelson  Monument  in  Trafalgar  Square.  The  can- 
vas is  thinly  painted,  in  the  charming  manner 
which  Mr.  Hamilton  affects,  and  as  an  intimate 
portrait  of  a great  man  off  guard,  nothing  could 
be  more  expressive.  There  is  a grandeur  about 
the  massive  head,  a sympathy  in  the  painting  of 
the  fine  old  hands  and  suggestion  of  the  slippered 
feet,  that  quite  holds  the  spectator. 

The  portrait  of  the  Honourable  Richard  Vaux 


PORTRAIT  OF  MR.  AND  MRS.  JOHN  W.  FIELD. 
By  John  Singer  Sargent. 


Ube  portrait  (Bailers  Completes  129 


has  more  point  in  this  collection,  as  the  present- 
ment of  a noted  lawyer,  diplomat  and  congressman 
of  Philadelphia,  a one-time  familiar  figure  in  our 
midst.  It  possesses  the  same  charming  qualities 
as  the  Gladstone  portrait.  A group  of  eight  friends 
of  the  Academy  presented  the  portrait  in  1895. 

John  Singer  Sargent  (1856-  ) is  represented 

by  an  excellent  portrait  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  John  W. 
Field,  painted  in  Paris  in  1882,  and  presented  by 
Mrs.  Field  in  1891. 

The  portrait  of  these  two  aged  benefactors  of 
the  Academy  is  a beautiful  example  of  Sargent’s 
work  at  a period  when  his  reputation  as  one  of 
the  greatest  of  living  portrait  painters  was  still  in 
the  making.  It  is  tender  and  sympathetic  and 
remarkably  true  in  the  flesh  painting,  exhibiting 
none  of  the  fire-works  of  technique  to  which  his 
extraordinary  facility  has  latterly  led  him.  While 
in  cleverness  it  is  second  to  none  of  his  canvases, 
in  sincerity  it  is  the  superior  of  many. 

Mrs.  Field  was  a daughter  of  Richard  Peters, 
Jr.,  whose  portrait  by  Rembrandt  Peale  and  that 
of  his  wife  Abigail  Willing,  by  Stuart,  hang  upon 
the  opposite  wall  of  the  Gilpin  Gallery. 


CHAPTER  VIII 


THE  TEMPLE  AND  OTHER  COLLECTIONS 

The  formation  of  the  Temple  Collection  dates 
from  1880,  when  Joseph  E.  Temple,  a director  of 
the  Academy,  executed  a deed  of  trust,  by  which, 
amongst  other  benefits,  the  Institution  became  pos- 
sessed of  an  annual  income  of  $1800  to  be  expended 
in  the  purchase  of  pictures  and  the  award  of  the 
Temple  medal,  both  the  purchases  and  awards 
being  specifically  limited  to  the  work  of  American 
artists  shown  in  the  exhibitions  of  the  Academy. 
The  collection  includes  at  present  about  sixty  paint- 
ings by  contemporary  American  artists. 

The  chef  dy oeuvre  of  the  collection  is  the  “ Por- 
trait of  Mrs.  C.”  familiarly  “ The  Lady  with  the 
White  Shawl,”  by  William  Merritt  Chase,  one 
of  the  loveliest  things  ever  painted  by  this  artist. 
The  picture  was  acquired  in  1895,  being  at  that 
time  considered  one  of  the  artist’s  best  works,  a 
position  it  has  never  had  to  yield  to  any  of  his 
subsequent  performances.  “ The  Lady  with  the 
White  Shawl  ” is  in  every  way  a museum  picture 
and  justifies,  by  its  sincerity  and  its  dignity,  Chase’s 

130 


ttbe  Uemple  mb  Qtbci  Collections  131 


high  place  in  the  world  of  eminent  American  paint- 
ers. It  has  those  sterling  and  universal  qualities 
of  portraiture  which  characterize  the  work  of  all 
the  greatest  masters  of  the  art.  The  personality 
presented  is  an  extremely  appealing  one,  whose 
serenity  pervades  and  dominates  by  force  of  its 
intrinsic  worth  the  technical  features  of  the  canvas. 
This  is  as  it  should  be.  For  pure  painting  the 
picture  compares  with  the  best  period  of  Garolus 
Duran,  as  instanced  in  his  “ Dame  au  Gant,”  in 
the  Luxembourg  Museum.  It  is  in  the  vein  of  the 
early  work  of  Sargent  when  he  was  still  investi- 
gating, and  has  nothing  in  common  with  the  over 
ripe  period  of  all  three  painters,  when  technical 
brilliancy  gained  supremacy  over  all  those  subtler, 
more  tender  qualities  which  stand  for  what  one 
really  loves  in  painting.  “ The  Lady  with  the 
White  Shawl  ” will  always  stand  as  one  of  the 
most  charming  things  produced  in  its  particular 
epoch. 

Later,  when,  with  Chase,  “ style  ” became  a mat- 
ter of  more  moment;  when  in  common  with  all 
the  brilliantly  successful  painters  of  his  period 
brush  work  became  the  all-absorbing  feature  of  the 
metier,  and  portraiture  degenerated  into  a mere 
background  for  the  display  of  amazing  feats  of 
facility  — of  feu  d’ artifice,  his  painting  lost  in 
depth  what  it  gained  in  brilliancy.  Of  this  change 


132  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  jfine  Hrts 


however  one  good  thing  came.  Under  the  inspira- 
tion of  a thorough  mastery  of  the  medium  Chase 
made  many  an  exhibition  of  tour  de  force , espei- 
cially  in  the  line  of  still-life  painting,  of  which  he 
has  become  one  of  the  foremost  exponents  in  this 
country.  The  Academy  preserves  an  excellent  ex- 
ample of  a series  of  studies  of  fish  which  the 
painter  made  at  this  time,  and  in  which  one  ad- 
mires the  delightful  freedom  of  the  method  of 
painting,  the  remarkable  fluency  of  the  brush,  the 
scintillating  textures  of  the  fish,  the  brass  and  the 
minor  accessories  of  the  canvas. 

“ The  Fox  Hunt”  by  Winslow  Homer  (1836- 
1910),  painted  in  1903,  is  a superb  example  of  the 
work  of  this  master  and  is  admirable  for  its 
strength  of  mass  and  for  its  composition.  The 
picture  is  an  unusual  one  and  of  extraordinary 
power.  It  is  a winter  scene.  Through  the  deep, 
drifted  snow,  the  fox  runs  swiftly,  while  above  his 
head  the  two  pursuing  blackbirds  keep  pace  with 
the  hunted  animal,  serving  a rich  purpose  of  dec- 
oration in  the  composition.  The  chase  follows  the 
coast,  and  on  beyond  the  white  expanse  of  snow 
are  rocks  upon  which  the  breakers  dash  with  their 
accompaniment  of  high  tossed  spray,  while  through 
a rift  in  the  lowering  sky  the  sun  glares  upon  the 
bed  of  the  ocean,  throwing  into  strong  relief  the 
horizon  line. 


THE  FOX  HUNT. 
By  Winslow  Homer. 


Ube  TTemple  anb  ©tbec  Collections  133 

The  snow  is  soft  and  dry  and  offers  no  resist- 
ance to  the  fox,  who  moves  forward  with  long 
graceful  step,  his  head  turned  anxiously  toward 
the  source  of  danger.  The  moment  is  intensely 
dramatic,  a factor  that  is  well  carried  out  in  the 
colour  of  the  picture,  which  is  full  of  magnificent 
contrast. 

Homer  was  the  most  typically  American  painter 
which  the  country  had  produced  up  to  his  time. 
He  was  born  in  Boston  and,  after  some  ordinary 
instruction  in  his  chosen  profession,  was  sent  to 
the  front  at  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War  as  a 
special  correspondent  and  artist  for  Harper’s. 

His  first  pronounced  success  as  a painter  came 
from  the  exhibition  of  “ Prisoners  from  the  Front,” 
painted  in  1865.  He  has  since  painted  a great 
variety  of  subjects,  of  which  his  best  known  have 
been  those  rugged  canvases  expressing  the  mighty 
moods  of  the  sea.  For  years,  toward  the  latter 
half  of  his  life,  he  lived  an  isolated  life  on  the 
Maine  coast,  studying  his  subject  in  all  its  various 
moods,  painting  always  the  grandeur  of  the  rock- 
bound  coast  in  its  most  dramatic  relation  with  the 
ocean. 

As  a water  colourist  Homer  did  the  kind  of 
work  that  placed  him  again  in  a class  by  himself. 
In  his  well  known  sketches  of  Bermuda  he  pushes 
the  slighter  medium  to  gigantic  feats  of  expres- 


134  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


sion.  Throughout  his  career  Homer  was  a painter 
of  the  elemental  in  nature;  he  saw  the  great,  the 
noble  and  the  overpowering.  Whether  his  work 
will  justify  the  immense  value  placed  upon  it  dur- 
ing his  life  time  is  for  the  future  to  show  — he 
is  too  recently  dead  for  the  present  generation  to 
properly  estimate  his  worth. 

A very  honest  tribute  to  the  nature  painting  in 
this  picture  was  paid  to  the  canvas  by  Mason 
Brown,  an  Adirondack  guide  attached  to  Mr. 
Coates’  camp  at  Saranack.  The  story  is  told  by 
Mr.  Trask,  the  manager  of  the  Academy,  who 
entertained  the  woodsman  on  his  first  visit  to  Phil- 
adelphia. He  wanted  to  see  the  pictures  and  Mr. 
Trask  was  showing  him  the  galleries  of  the  insti- 
tution, while  Mason,  feeling  that  some  comment 
was  necessary,  but  having  a vocabulary  of  only  one 
adjective,  used  it  incessantly,  as  he  passed  from 
canvas  to  canvas  in  his  perfunctory  and  rather 
embarrassed  way.  “ That’s  a pretty  picture,” 
“ That’s  a very  pretty  picture,”  “ Now  that  really 
is  a pretty  picture,”  was  all  he  could  find  to  say 
until  suddenly  he  caught  sight  of  the  Homer.  All 
his  city  manner  dropped  from  him  and  starting 

toward  the  picture  he  ejaculated,  “ By  , I’ve 

seen  things  that  looked  like  that ! ” 

The  Collection  contains  one  example  of  the  ma- 
ternity series  of  that  interesting  painter,  George  de 


MOTHER  AND  CHILD. 

By  George  de  Forrest  Brush. 


Ube  Uemple  anb  ©tber  Collections  135 


Forrest  Brush  (1855-  ) in  the  group  entitled 

“ Mother  and  Child  ” acquired  by  the  institution 
in  1898. 

No  stronger  contrast  could  be  made  than  that 
which  exists  between  Brush  and  Homer.  While 
Homer  is  a most  vigorous  exponent  of  nature  in 
her  rugged  moods,  Brush  draws  more  and  more 
upon  art  for  his  source  of  inspiration.  His  work 
is  very  Florentine  in  character,  shows  strongly  the 
influences  which  the  painter  has  absorbed  during 
his  many  years  residence  in  Italy.  It  is  not  the 
robust  painting  of  the  Venetian  School,  which  has 
left  its  mark  upon  him,  but  rather  the  gentler  mas- 
ters of  a century  before  the  Renaissance  — Peru- 
gino,  Philippino  Lippi,  Botticelli  and  kindred  paint- 
ers. 

The  Academy’s  canvas  is  the  Madonna  in  a 
circular  composition,  similar  to  the  group  in  the 
Boston  Museum  of  Fine  Arts.  The  child  is  in 
the  arms  of  the  mother,  both  soberly  clad,  which 
throws  into  relief  the  painting  of  the  flesh.  A 
second  child,  a boy,  is  to  be  discerned  in  the  shadow 
of  the  background. 

The  portrait  of  Rudolph  Hennig,  the  “ Cello 
Player,”  by  Thomas  Eakins  (1844-  ),  is  one  of 

the  masterpieces  of  this  venerable  artist.  It  repre- 
sents one  of  Philadelphia’s  most  noted  musicians, 
who  died  May  28,  1904.  The  picture  is  signed  on 


136  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  ffine  Brts 


the  front  with  the  date,  1896.  Eakins,  as  a rule, 
did  not  hit  upon  the  happy  side  of  his  sitters,  but 
his  portrait  of  Mr.  Hennig  is  a true  delineation  of 
character,  and  expresses  all  the  gentleness  and  fine- 
ness of  that  noble  gentleman,  whom  so  many  of 
us  remember  with  affection  and  respect.  While 
Eakins  painted  upon  the  portrait,  Mr.  Hennig  was 
accustomed  to  practise  for  his  concert  work,  and 
in  the  picture  the  most  telling  quality  is  its  sense 
of  concentration  and  movement.  The  sensitive 
hand  that  holds  the  bow  is  not  lax,  it  vibrates  with 
the  pressure  upon  the  strings,  while  the  head  is 
turned  in  a way  intensely  characteristic  of  the  sitter 
when  playing,  as  though  listening  intently  to  the 
quality  of  the  tone,  the  justness  of  the  pitch,  which 
was  always  faultless. 

Eakins  is  best  represented  in  the  collection  of  the 
University  of  Pennsylvania,  which  owns  his  mas- 
terpiece, a portrait  of  Dr.  Agnew  demonstrating 
before  his  class  in  anatomy  and  another  of  Dr. 
Gross. 

Thomas  P.  Anshutz  (1851-  ) is  represented 

in  the  collection  by  his  portrait  in  pastel  entitled 
" Becky  Sharp,”  the  model  for  which  was  one  of 
Mr.  Anshutz’  students,  which  was  painted  at  the 
time  when  his  ability  as  a portrait  painter  began 
to  be  officially  recognized. 

Mr.  Anshutz  has  been  associated  with  the  Acad- 


THE  ’CELLO  PLAYER. 

By  Thomas  Eakins. 


Zbc  TTemple  anb  ©tber  Collections  137 


emy  since  its  removal  to  the  present  building, 
where,  under  Thomas  Eakins,  he  was  one  of  the 
earliest  students.  Since  1881  he  has  been  an  in- 
structor in  the  schools,  and  is  at  present  the  chief 
of  the  faculty.  He  has  had  a hand  in  the  making 
of  hundreds  of  the  artists  of  this  generation,  all 
who  have  studied  in  the  Academy  since  1881  hav- 
ing come  under  his  jurisdiction. 

His  leading  qualification  as  an  artist  is  his 
draughtsmanship,  due  to  long  years  of  study  from 
the  antique,  from  which  he  has  made  a series  of 
powerful  drawings.  He  is  a remarkable  example 
of  a genius  that  developed  its  fullest  power  com- 
paratively late  in  life,  his  last  pictures  having  been 
much  stronger  than  any  that  preceded  them. 

Alexander  Harrison  (1853-  ),  a Philadelphian 

whose  genius  has  been  fostered  almost  altogether 
in  France,  is  represented  by  “ The  Wave,”  one 
of  the  most  successful  of  his  marine  pictures, 
painted  when  Harrison  was  in  the  zenith  of  his 
power.  It  is  considered  the  best  of  three  similar 
pictures  painted  by  Harrison  — two  of  which  are 
owned  in  Philadelphia. 

“ The  Bell  Buoy  ” by  William  T.  Richards 
(I^33'I9°7)  was  purchased  from  the  Temple 
Fund  the  same  year  as  the  Harrison  (1891)  and 
shows  another  artist’s  view  of  a similar  subject. 
Richards,  during  his  lifetime,  enjoyed  a great 


138  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  of  ifine  Brts 


measure  of  popularity  as  a sea  painter,  and  the 
Academy’s  example  is  characteristic.  He  fell  early 
into  a recipe  for  painting  marines,  which  was  so 
successful  that  he  never  felt  the  need  of  changing 
his  attitude  toward  that  most  varied  of  subjects. 

The  Academy  possesses  the  best  known  canvas 
of  Charles  H.  Davis  (1856-  ),  “The  Brook,” 

purchased  from  its  sixty-first  annual  exhibition  in 
1891.  Davis  has  considerably  changed  his  style, 
which  exhibited  all  the  symptoms  of  crystallization 
at  the  time  that  this  picture  was  painted,  and  he 
now  attempts  to  compete  with  the  more  rugged 
painters  of  the  so-called  nature  school.  “ The 
Brook  ” is  pervaded  by  a sympathetic,  poetic  feel- 
ing tinged  with  the  sentimental,  and  belongs  to 
that  style  of  studio  landscape  which  the  open  air 
painters  have  taught  us  to  forego. 

Cecilia  Beaux,  the  most  celebrated  of  local 
women  painters,  is  represented  by  her  portrait  of 
“ A New  England  Woman,”  painted  in  1896  and 
purchased  by  the  Academy  the  same  year.  The 
portrait  is  a delightful  study  of  a woman  in  a white 
dress  holding  a green-bound  palm  leaf  fan.  There 
are  touches  of  lavender  at  the  wrists,  waist  and 
throat  and  her  reddish  blond  hair  is  neatly  brushed 
beneath  a cap.  She  sits  on  a low  white  chair  before 
a window  and  the  interior  of  the  room  suggests 
an  harmonious  environment  for  one  of  her  simple 


BECKY  SHARP. 

By  Thomas  P.  Anshutz. 


Ube  Uemple  anb  ©tber  Collections  139 

tastes.  The  painter  has  done  more  clever  work 
than  this  portrait  but  it  charms  by  its  sincerity  and 
simplicity. 

Robert  Vonnoh  (1858-  ) is  represented  by  two 

excellent  and  characteristic  pictures  in  this  collec- 
tion. The  first,  “ Companion  of  the  Studio,”  is 
an  early  work,  signed  on  the  front  with  the  date, 
1888.  It  is  doubly  interesting  as  a robust  piece  of 
portraiture  and  as  souvenir  of  a fellow  student  of 
Mr.  Vonnoh’s,  Mr.  John  Pinhey,  of  Ottawa,  now 
of  Montreal.  lit  is  a vigorous  canvas,  full  of  life 
and  personality. 

The  second  example  of  the  painter’s  work  is  a 
landscape,  “ November,”  dated  two  years  later, 
1890.  It  is  an  important  picture  of  the  painter’s 
most  plastic  period.  The  canvas  expresses  the 
peculiar  quality  of  the  French  landscape,  and  was 
done  presumably  at  Grez,  where  he  lived  at  the 
time  and  where  he  still  returns  to  paint  that  charm- 
ing country  close  to  the  Forest  of  Fontainebleau. 

Mr.  Vonnoh  was  associated  with  the  Academy 
for  a number  of  years  as  the  head  instructor  in  the 
schools  and  is  to  be  remembered  as  the  instigator 
of  the  movement  which  resulted  in  the  formation 
of  The  Fellowship  of  the  Pennsylvania  Academy 
of  the  Fine  Arts. 

Gari  Melchers  is  represented  in  the  Temple  Col- 
lection by  an  early  work,  one  of  the  first  which 


140  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  fine  Brts 


develops  his  present  style  of  painting.  “ Th 
Skaters  ” was  painted  in  1901.  The  canvas  is  full 
of  the  individual  point  of  view,  and  fresh,  invig 
orating  open  air  sense,  with  which  this  painte 
infuses  his  painting.  The  boy  and  girl,  equippec 
for  weather,  move  swiftly  across  the  foreground  Oj 
a snow-clad  landscape  with  houses.  It  is  cold,  yei 
cheery,  and  the  relation  between  the  figures  and  * 
the  landscape  is  admirably  handled. 

Henry  Ossawa  Tanner  (1859-  ),  a Pennsylva- 

nian, is  represented  by  one  of  his  biblical  subjects,  \ 
entitled  “ Nicodemus,”  painted  in  Jerusalem  in 
1899. 

The  latest  addition  to  the  Temple  Collection  is 
a painting  by  Walter  MacEwen  entitled  “ Phyllis.” 

It  is  quite  representative  of  the  work  of  this  genial 
artist,  whose  models  are  always  gowned  in  the  cos- 
tume of  half  a century  or  more  ago.  “Miss 
Phyllis  ” might  be  a Civil  War  heroine  as  she  sits 
in  shimmering  silk  against  a large  mirror  which 
reflects  her  charming  profile. 

Of  the  group  of  Boston  painters,  a few  have 
been  cared  for.  Willard  L.  Metcalf  is  the  only 
one  adequately  represented  however.  His  canvas, 

“ Twin  Birches,”  is  one  of  the  most  successful  he 
has  accomplished.  The  subject  is  a typically  New 
England  one  and  the  rendering  is  delicate  and 
appreciative.  The  twin  trees  are  daintily  silhouetted 


By  Robert  Vonnoh. 


Ube  tlemple  anb  ©tber  Collections  141 


against  the  early  morning  sky,  their  translucent 
leaves  gleaming  in  the  awakening  of  a summer 
morning.  If  the  picture  has  a fault  it  is  a lack  of 
depth,  the  detail  in  the  distant  hills  is  not  backed 
up  by  sufficient  strength  in  the  foreground. 

The  “ Golden  Screen  ” of  Edmund  C.  Tarbell 
belongs  unfortunately  to  a transition  period  of  this 
painter’s  work  and  is  scarcely  a result.  It  was 
acquired  in  1899. 

Childe  Hassam’s  small  canvas  called  “ Cat 
Boats : Newport  ” is  hardly  of  sufficient  impor- 
tance to  represent  this  distinguished  artist  in  an 
Academy  of  this  class,  yet  it  is  a very  charming 
little  picture. 

The  Twachtman  catalogued  is  an  inferior  ex- 
ample of  this  the  rarest  flower  of  American  im- 
pressionism. 

Two  of  our  most  distinguished  native  artists, 
whose  work  is  thoroughly  American,  thoroughly 
local,  though  superbly  represented  in  the  various 
great  museums  of  the  country  are  known  in  this 
collection  by  but  fragmentary  and  inadequate  ex- 
amples of  their  skill.  One  refers  to  Edward  W. 
Redfield  and  W.  Elmer  Schofield.  To  judge  of 
their  remarkable  attainments  in  the  field  of  land- 
scape work,  one  must  go  to  other  cities  or  watch 
the  current  exhibitions. 

The  influence  of  the  work  of  Edward  W.  Red- 


142  t>ennsph>anta  Hcabemp  of  fine  Hrts 


field  upon  the  landscape  of  the  present  day  is  one 
of  the  strongest  in  the  movement  of  contemporary 
art.  His  work  is  characterized  by  a tremendous 
definiteness,  a breadth  of  handling  that  is  most 
expressive  of  the  modern  tendency.  “ The  Old 
Elm  ” is  fragmentary,  as  we  have  said,  and  it 
shows  the  painter’s  directness  of  method  denuded 
of  the  charm  which  is  usually  characteristic  of  his 
canvases.  It  is  undeniably  painty,  a fault  into 
which  Redfield  slips  easily,  but  it  has  at  least,  and 
to  a remarkable  degree,  the  sense  of  out  of  doors. 
It  is  more  than  an  impression,  it  is  nature  itself, 
and  here  is  where,  as  a result,  it  fails,  while  as  an 
experiment  it  is  of  exceeding  interest.  The  date 
is  1906. 

• Of  his  great  pictures  the  Chicago  Institute  owns 
a very  handsome  example,  a hillside  with  cedars. 
Redfield  has  painted  recently  some  springtime  pic- 
tures which  show  a new  departure  in  subject : they 
are  full  of  subtleties  of  colour,  of  intricacies  of 
method,  very  different  from  the  old  direct  way, 
and  vastly  richer  in  imagination.  His  later  pic- 
tures have  a depth,  a profundity,  which  carries  the 
mind  beyond  the  surface  of  the  canvas,  deep  into 
the  atmosphere  of  the  picture. 

Redfield  began  his  career  as  a student  in  the 
Pennsylvania  Academy,  where  he  figured  as  a 
promising  student  in  the  eighties.  As  a very  young. 


THE  SKATERS. 
By  Gari  Melchers. 


Zbc  Ttemple  an&  ©tber  Collections  143 

man  he  went  to  Paris  to  pursue  his  studies  and 
spent  some  years  near  Barbizon,  on  the  edge  of 
the  Forest  of  Fontainebleau,  painting  the  French 
landscape.  He  returned  to  this  country  and  set- 
tled in  Centre  Bridge,  a picturesque  part  of  Bucks 
County,  Pennsylvania,  close  to  the  Delaware  River. 
Here  almost  all  of  his  pictures  have  been  painted 
under  the  varying  effects  of  winter,  late  autumn 
and  approaching  spring.  From  the  first  his  com- 
positions have  been  powerful  and  individual  and 
from  the  simplest  of  themes  he  has  yearly  elab- 
orated and  increased  his  power  of  expression. 

W.  Elmer  Schofield,  a contemporary  and  fellow 
student  of  Redfield,  is  represented  in  the  Academy 
by  “ Winter,”  a canvas  even  less  characteristic  of 
the  work  of  this  interesting  painter.  It  was  bought 
in  1899,  from  the  sixty-eighth  annual  exhibition 
of  the  Academy,  and  is  therefore  an  early  work  of 
the  artist,  done  before  he  had  found  himself. 
Though  Schofield  has  spent  many  years  in  Eng- 
land, he  remains  essentially  an  American  painter 
and  a painter  of  American  subjects. 

Of  the  work  of  a third  Philadelphian  of  the  same 
period,  Charles  Morris  Young,  the  Academy  pre- 
serves an  early  work  entitled,  “ Winter  Morning 
After  Snow.” 

As  a tribute  to  the  rising  school  of  “ Young 
America  ” painters,  the  Academy  represents  George 


144  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


W.  Bellows,  of  New  York,  by  the  best  example  of 
his  forceful,  uncompromising  style  that  has  found 
its  way  to  Academy  exhibitions.  This  is  a winter 
scene,  called  “ North  River,”  and  pictures  a steam- 
boat struggling  to  back  out  of  port  through  the 
frozen  water. 

Miscellaneous  Collections  — American  School 

The  miscellaneous  collections  of  the  Academy 
contain  a number  of  pictures  by  American  painters 
which  have  been  purchased  from  the  Gilpin  Fund, 
or  acquired  by  gift  and  otherwise. 

The  Academy  preserves  two  interesting  exam- 
ples of  the  work  of  William  Morris  Hunt  (1824- 
1879),  one  of  the  strongest  figures  of  the  last  cen- 
tury in  American  painting.  He  was  born  in  Brat- 
tleborough,  Vermont,  in  1824  and  died  at  the  Isles 
of  Shoals  in  1879,  after  a life  of  more  than  ordi- 
nary success  and  achievement.  Hunt  was  origi- 
nally educated  to  be  a sculptor,  an  influence  which 
is  felt  in  his  sense  of  solidity  and  form.  He  stud- 
ied painting  in  Dusseldorf  and  under  Couture  in 
Paris,  where  he  became  the  friend  and  an  early 
patron  of  Millet,  whose  works  he  had  the  honour 
to  first  introduce  to  this  country.  He  returned  to 
America  in  1855  and  resided  at  Newport,  but 
finally  settled  in  Boston,  where  he  had  many  pupils. 
In  1875  he  published  a work  which  has  become 


Ube  Uemple  anb  ©tber  Collections  145 


the  handbook  of  students,  embodying  his  views  and 
known  under  the  familiar  title  of  “ Talks  on  Art.” 
He  devoted  himself  to  genre,  history,  and  finally  to 
landscape  in  his  maturer  days,  while  his  early  line 
was  portraiture. 

“ The  Flight  of  Night,”  purchased  from  the 
Gilpin  Fund  in  1898,  is  the  original  sketch  for 
Hunt’s  greatest  work,  the  mural  paintings  for  the 
Assembly  Room  of  the  State  Capitol  at  Albany, 
which  became  seriously  damaged  and  were  entirely 
obliterated  in  1888.  There  were  two  decorations 
for  the  Capitol  which  represented  respectively 
“ The  great  opposing  forces  of  Nature : Night  and 
Day,  Feminine  and  Masculine,  Darkness  and  Light, 
Superstition  and  Science,  Pagan  and  Divine 
Thought,  Self  and  Altruism.”  This  sketch  repre- 
sents “ Anahita,  the  Persian  Goddess  of  the  Moon 
and  Night,  who  stands  for  the  negative  or  Fem- 
inine force.”  The  picture  is  described  as  follows : 

“ Anahita,  driven  forth  from  her  realms  of  Fan- 
tasy and  Unreality,  impelled  by  the  dawn  of  civili- 
zation, plunges,  with  her  airy  car,  into  the  dark 
and  hidden  caverns  of  superstition  and  barbaric 
thought.  The  slave  who  bears  an  inverted  torch, 
holds  back  the  horses,  that  Anahita  may  look  her 
last  upon  the  Kingdom  she  so  soon  must  relinquish. 
The  horses  obey  her  will  without  the  ribbons,  by 
which,  in  earlier  sketches,  they  were  guided.  This 


146  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  arts 


suggests  the  power  of  mind  over  matter.  By  the 
side  of  the  Cloud  Chariot  float,  in  a dark-blue  trans- 
lucent ether,  the  sleeping  forms  of  a human  Mother 
and  Child.  This  vision  hints  to  the  Queen  of  the 
Night  of  other  worlds  than  hers,  where  love  and  rest 
belong,  and,  as  she  hurries  on  her  course,  between 
the  contending  forces  of  Day  and  Night,  Light  and 
Darkness,  a look  of  human  doubt  surprises  the 
beauty  of  her  Pagan  countenance  and  renders  her 
as  tragic  and  typical  a figure  as  that  of  the  Colum- 
bus, and  the  fitting  counterpart.” 

Hunt’s  second  canvas  is  an  easel  picture  entitled 
“ Girl  with  White  Cap.”  It  is  a beautiful  and 
interesting  piece  of  painting,  showing  what  a 
superior  artist  the  painter  was  and  how  closely 
he  was  tied  in  spirit  with  his  friend  Millet  and  his 
master  Couture.  In  its  breadth  of  treatment  and 
vigour  of  painting,  the  work  bears  considerable 
resemblance  to  the  Head  by  Couture  noticed  in  the 
chapter  on  the  Gibson  Collection. 

An  interesting  exhibit  is  a landscape  entitled 
“ Port  Ben,  Delaware  and  Hudson  Canal,”  painted 
by  Theodore  Robinson  (1852-1896)  in  1893,  and 
presented  by  the  Society  of  American  Artists,  as 
a memorial  to  the  painter,  in  1900.  Theodore  Rob- 
inson was  one  of  the  most  promising  of  a group 
of  Americans  who,  studying  in  Paris  in  the  eight- 
ies, came  under  the  influence  of  the  French  impres- 


Cbe  Cemple  anb  ©tbec  Collections  147 


sionists  of  that  period,  principally  Monet,  of  whom 
Robinson  became  the  friend  and  pupil.  He  died 
too  young  to  realize  fully  the  promise  of  his  genius, 
but  in  this  example  may  be  seen  how  thoroughly 
he  understood  the  painting  of  light  and  the  vibra- 
tions of  a sunny  atmosphere.  Robinson  lived  some 
years  in  Giverny,  that  lovely  spot  in  the  province 
of  Eure,  where  Monet  still  resides.  An  innkeeper 
of  the  place  shows  with  pride  a quantity  of  sketches, 
made  by  the  painter  during  his  residence  there, 
and  left  behind  on  the  occasion  of  his  last  visit. 

A representative  canvas  by  J.  Alden  Weir  is  his 
“ Mid-day  Rest,”  presented  to  the  Academy  by  a 
group  of  five  friends  of  the  institution,  including 
Dr.  Francis  W.  Lewis,  J.  G.  Rosengarten,  Robert 
C.  Ogden  and  Edward  H.  Coates  and  Isaac  H. 
Clothier. 


CHAPTER  IX 


THE  OLD  MASTERS 

The  Pennsylvania  Academy,  like  the  provincial 
museums  of  Europe,  is  admirable  in  its  preservation 
of  the  works  of  the  local  masters,  who  worked  in 
Philadelphia  at  the  time  of  its  foundation  and  who 
were  par  excellence  its  raison  d'etre.  Though  the 
great  fire  of  1845  and  a second  conflagration,  which 
destroyed  the  North  Gallery  and  its  valuable  con- 
tents in  the  early  eighties,  burned  up  the  greater 
part  of  the  old  masters  which  had  been  given  to  the 
Academy  in  the  early  days,  the  institution  at  no 
time  in  its  career  has  made  a point  of  representing 
the  masters  of  any  school  of  painters  other  than 
the  contemporary  Americans.  In  this  it  is  unique, 
and  while  its  paucity  of  “ old  masters  ” is  at  times 
deplored  and  questioned,  its  great  value  as  a 
museum  thoroughly  representative  of  the  art  of  its 
own  particular  epoch  and  locality,  cannot  be  too 
much  insisted  upon  as  the  point  of  the  whole  in- 
stitution ; a point  which  in  the  coming  centuries,  as 
America  gains  ground  as  an  artistic  centre,  will 
become  accepted  and  extolled. 

148 


Ube  ©lb  /iDasters 


149 


The  galleries  of  Holland  are  marvellous  in  their 
preservation  of  the  works  of  the  Dutch  masters 
who  flourished  in  that  little  country  in  its  palmy 
days;  the  museums  of  Belgium  must  be  visited  if 
we  would  form  an  adequate  idea  of  the  output  of 
her  greatest  painters;  the  marvels  of  the  sculpture 
of  the  French  Renaissance  are  only  to  be  understood 
after  a visit  to  Tours  where  Michel  Colomb  lived 
and  wrought;  while  each  little  town  of  Italy  is 
famous  for  some  bit  of  local  art  done  by  the  artists 
who  had  their  birth  there.  While  the  wars  of  Napo- 
leon did  much  to  disseminate  the  prolific  output  of 
the  great  Italian  artists  one  cannot  pretend  to  study 
the  Venetians  outside  of  Venice,  the  Florentines 
out  of  Florence  and  the  Romans  away  from  Rome. 

For  all  its  magnificence,  the  Kaiser  Friederich 
Museum  misses  the  whole  of  the  intimate  meaning 
of  those  institutions  that  the  Pennsylvania  Academy, 
no  less  than  the  Prado,  represents,  whose  spontane- 
ous birth  is  the  response  to  the  mingled  urgency  of 
the  man,  the  place  and  the  hour. 

The  Academy,  nevertheless,  in  its  miscellaneous 
collections,  preserves  a number  of  old  masters,  of 
which  the  piece  de  resistance  is  “ The  Violinist,”  by 
Bartholomeus  van  der  Heist  (1613-1670),  one 
of  the  most  celebrated  of  the  Dutch  School  of 
painters,  at  a time  when  it  held  supremacy  over  all 
others.  Van  der  Heist  was  the  contemporary  and 


150  Pennsylvania  HcaDemy  ot  fftne  Hr ts 


compeer  of  Franz  Hals,  Rembrandt  and  Ver  Meer 
of  Delft  and  was  born  in  Hals’  birthplace,  Haarlem, 
when  that  master  was  twenty-nine  years  of  age. 
It  is  supposed  that  Nicholas  Elias  was  his  instructor, 
but  he  was  chiefly  influenced  by  the  work  of  Hals. 
Van  der  Heist  settled  in  Amsterdam  when  very 
young,  and  lived  there  the  greater  part  of  his  life. 

The  strength  of  his  work  lies  in  its  robust  sim- 
plicity of  conception,  its  vigorous  solidity  of  method 
and  unfailing  precision.  His  drawing  was  free  and 
masterly,  his  draperies  broadly  painted  and  his 
colouring  beautiful.  His  most  famous  picture, 
“ The  Banquet  of  the  Civic  Guard  on  June  18, 
1648,”  was  painted  to  celebrate  the  conclusion  of 
peace  with  Spain  and  is  one  of  the  important  ex- 
hibits of  the  Rijks  Museum  of  Amsterdam. 

“ The  Violinist  ” was  first  exhibited  at  the  Acad- 
emy in  1836  and  is  one  of  the  pictures  which  es- 
caped the  fire.  The  subject  is  a young  artist,  who, 
with  the  head  thrown  back  in  evident  enjoyment  of 
the  music,  is  engaged  in  producing  eloquent  melo- 
dies from  his  instrument.  It  is  a musicianly  type, 
with  the  flowing  hair  and  sensitive  face.  The  cos- 
tume has  allowed  full  scope  to  the  painter’s  brush 
with  its  full,  fine,  white  shirt  and  rippling  sleeves, 
gathered  at  the  wrist.  It  is  a harmonious  and  beau- 
tiful canvas  as  well  as  an  unusual  example  of  the 
work  of  the  master. 


THE  VIOLINIST. 

By  Bartholomeus  van  der  Heist. 


Ube  <S>lb  /IDasters 


151 


The  Dutch  and  Flemish  Schools  are  rather  better 
represented  than  any  other  of  the  foreign  groups. 
There  are  canvases  by  Nicholas  Bosschaert,  a fruit 
and  flower  painter  of  the  eighteenth  century ; Gras- 
beek,  a genre  painter  somewhat  after  the  style  of 
Gerard  Dou;  Pieter  Janszoon  van  Asch,  of  Delft, 
who  painted  small  canvases;  Jan  van  Goyen,  one  of 
the  earliest  of  the  Dutch  landscape  painters ; Pieter 
van  Lint,  Adrian  van  Ostade,  Cornelius  van  Poelen- 
burgh,  Egbert  van  der  Poel,  Jan  Joris  van  der 
Vliet,  Dominicus  van  Tol,  Hendrik  Cornelius 
Vroom  and  Philip  Wouverman.  Of  Antoine 
Francois  van  der  Meulen,  of  Brussels,  the  Acad- 
emy owns  “ A Cavalry  Charge  ” and  “ A Battle 
Scene,”  both  small  panels.  Van  der  Meulen  lived 
during  the  reign  of  Louis  XIV,  who  was  one  of  the 
greatest  patrons  of  the  Flemish  and  Dutch  Schools. 
He  invited  the  painter  to  Paris  and  gave  him  apart- 
ments at  the  Gobelins,  where  he  was  employed  on 
designs  for  tapestry.  The  king  heaped  riches  and 
distinctions  on  him. 

The  “ Portrait  of  Henrietta  van  Haavens  ” is  an 
admirable  work  attributed  to  the  famous  Dutch 
painter,  Godfried  Schalken  (1643-1706),  a disciple 
of  Gerard  Dou,  and  best  known  as  a genre  painter. 
His  most  familiar  subjects  are  small  domestic 
scenes,  chiefly  candle  lights.  His  small  pictures 
were  very  popular  and  he  painted  the  principal 


152  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  afine  Brts 

families  of  his  native  town,  Dordrecht,  when,  in- 
spired by  the  success  of  Sir  Godfrey  Kneller,  ho 
quitted  Holland  and  tried  portrait  painting  in  Eng- 
land, at  the  court  of  William  III,  whose  portrait  he 
made.  His  venture  generally,  was  not  a success 
and  he  returned  to  Holland,  settling  this  time  in  The 
Hague.  He  is  represented  in  almost  every  gallery 
of  importance  in  Europe,  generally  by  one  or  more 
of  his  candle-lighted  pictures. 

The  portrait  of  Henrietta  van  Haavens  recalls 
Kneller’s  manner  and  is  a spirited  example  of  the 
portraiture  of  the  period.  Its  authenticity  as  a 
Schalken  is  questionable.  The  picture  was  pur- 
chased by  the  fund  contributed  by  the  Annual  Mem- 
bers of  the  Academy  in  1900. 

A small  collection  of  still-life  pictures  by  Frans 
Snyders  (1579-1657)  a Flemish  painter  of  consid- 
erable fame,  includes  “ Dead  Game  and  Dog,” 
“ Dog  and  Heron,”  “ Boar  Hunt,”  and  “Dead 
Game  and  Fruit,”  the  latter  presented  by  Mrs. 
Bloomfield  Moore,  in  1881.  These  are  the  typical 
product  of  the  period  in  which  Snyders  lived  and 
worked. 

The  painter  was  instructed  by  Hendrik  van  Balen 
and  Pieter  Breughel.  His  talent  excited  the  admira- 
tion of  Rubens,  who  frequently,  it  is  said,  intrusted 
him  with  the  painting  of  animals,  fruits  and  the 
still-life  of  his  pictures.  His  patrons  were  the  Arch- 


Ube  ©lb  Masters 


153 


duke  Albert  of  Brussels  and  the  King  of  Spain,  and 
his  contemporary,  Van  Dyck,  painted  his  portrait 
more  than  once. 

Second  in  importance  in  the  Academy’s  collection 
of  old  masters  is  the  Italian  School,  of  which  there 
is  a number  of  interesting  and  valuable  examples. 

A beautiful,  if  fragmentary,  example  of  the  work 
of  the  Italian  painter,  Guido  Reni  (1575-1642)  is 
preserved  by  the  Academy  in  his  “ Ganymede  ” or 
“ Jove’s  Cup  Bearer,”  which  was  one  of  the  earliest 
gifts  to  the  institution  from  Joseph  Allen  Smith, 
in  1812.  It  is  one  of  the  pictures  whose  romantic 
history  is  described  in  the  opening  chapter.  The 
subject,  which  is  represented  merely  by  the  head, 
is  one  of  those  beautiful,  ideal  types  which  Guido 
Reni  painted  when  most  under  the  influence  of  the 
Bolognese  artists.  The  head  is  shown  in  partial 
profile  and  as  a bit  of  pure  painting  is  a very  delight, 
in  its  quality  of  flatness,  its  caressed  surface  and  its 
exquisite  colour. 

Guido  was  a pupil  of  Ludovico  Carracci,  the 
founder  of  the  Bolognese  school,  and  was  also  asso- 
ciated with  Annibale  Carracci,  the  cousin  of  the 
former,  with  whose  work  Guido’s  has  possibly,  in  its 
earlier  stages,  more  in  common.  Through  Annibale, 
who  went  to  Parma  to  study  the  works  of  Cor- 
reggio* Guido  Reni  became  influenced  indirectly  by 
the  poetry  of  that  great  and  highly  individual  mas- 


154  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  jftne  Brts 


ter,  and  this  little  “ Ganymede  ” has  a charm  dis- 
tinctly characteristic  of  the  “ putti  ” of  Correggio, 
in  the  Convento  di  San  Paolo  in  Parma.  Later  he 
was  opposed,  through  jealousy,  by  Annibale. 

He  went  about  1608,  to  Rome,  where  he  re- 
mained about  twenty  years.  Here  he  executed  the 
celebrated  fresco  of  “ Aurora,”  in  the  Palazzo  Ros- 
piglioso,  and  the  doubtful  portrait  of  Beatrice  Cenci 
at  the  Palazzo  Barber  ini.  In  these,  as  well  as  in 
the  several  “ Ecce  Homos  ” at  Bologna,  Rome, 
Paris,  Dresden,  London  and  elsewhere,  will  be  noted 
the  deleterious  influence  which  his  work  suffered  in 
Rome,  where  he  had  so  much  temporal  success. 

Joseph  Allen  Smith  seems  to  have  had  a fancy 
for  mythological  subjects.  Among  the  few  of  his 
pictures  still  in  the  possession  of  the  Academy  are 
“ Cupid  with  a Vase  ” and  “ Cupid  Musing,”  by 
Bartolommeo  Schidone,  who  was  also  a pupil  of 
Carracci,  though  his  work  bears  more  resemblance 
to  the  style  of  Raphael  and  Correggio  than  that  of 
his  master.  His  pictures  are  extremely  rare. 
Schidone  was  born  in  Modena  in  1560  and  died 
in  Parma  in  1616.  The  two  examples  owned  by 
the  Academy  are  small  canvases  — twelve  by  fif- 
teen inches  — and  though  interesting  are  of  no 
great  importance. 

The  Academy  possesses  five  examples  of  Sal- 
vator Rosa  (1615-1673)  of  which  three  landscapes 


XTbe  Masters 


155 


were  presented  by  Joseph  Allen  Smith,  in  1812. 
Of  these  the  largest  is  “ Landscape : Mercury  De- 
ceiving *Axgus.”  This  is  a characteristic  example 
of  the  graceful  style  of  this  interesting  painter 
whose  life  was  so  full  of  incident.  Salvator  Rosa 
was  bom  in  Renella,  near  Naples  and  died  in  Rome. 
He  was  a pupil  of  his  uncle,  Paolo  Greco,  and  Fal- 
cone, and  is  also  said  to  have  studied  with  Ribera. 
He  lived  for  a while  among  the  banditti  of  the 
Abruzzi,  from  which  experience  are  drawn  many  of 
the  subjects  of  his  pictures.  He  went  to  Rome  in 
1635  and  soon  became  famous  as  a painter,  musi- 
cian and  satirical  poet.  In  1647  joined  the  revo- 
lution in  Naples  under  Masaniello  and  is  said  to 
have  been  a member  of  the  Compagnia  della  Morte, 
formed  for  the  waylaying  and  killing  of  the  Span- 
iards in  Naples.  His  masterpiece  is  considered  to 
be  the  “ Conspiracy  of  Catiline,”  in  the  Pitti  Palace 
in  Florence,  while  the  Uffizzi  guards  a superb  col- 
lection of  his  drawings.  He  excelled  in  battle 
pieces. 

Of  Ribera,  the  master  of  Salvator  Rosa,  the 
Academy  has  to  show  a large  canvas  entitled  “ The 
Cid,”  which  is  deposited  by  Miss  Mary  A.  Hearn. 
It  is  a handsome  painting  of  the  nude^  done  in 
the  master’s  robust  style  and  rich  colouring.  It  is 
a half-length,  facing  left,  the  figure  being  seated. 
Joseph  Ribera.  Lo  Spagnoletto  (1588-1656),  was 


156  ipennsstxmnta  Bcafcems  of  fftne  Brts 


born  at  Xativa,  now  San  Felipe,  near  Valencia, 
Spain,  and  died  at  Naples. 

■His  parents  designed  him  for  the  profession  of 
letters,  but  he  made  the  acquaintance  of  Francisco 
Ribalta  and  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  art 
under  that  master.  He  visited  Rome,  and,  being 
without  resources,  endured  many  hardships.  Fi- 
nally he  was  taken  under  the  protection  of  a Car- 
dinal and  his  fortunes  improved.  He  then  studied 
with  Caravaggio,  whose  system  of  chiaroscuro  had 
peculiar  attractions  for  him. 

After  a rupture  with  his  patron  he  became  a sol- 
dier and  experienced  many  vicissitudes,  even  be- 
coming a galley  slave  in  Algeria.  He  went  to 
Naples,  where  he  married  the  daughter  of  a wealthy 
picture  dealer,  and  where  his  Spanish  birth  brought 
him  into  high  favour  with  the  Spanish  rulers  of 
Naples,  and  he  was  appointed  Court  Painter  to  the 
Viceroy.  In  1630  he  became  a member  of  the 
Academy  of  St.  Luke  and  in  1644  received  the 
decoration  of  the  Order  of  Christ  from  the  Pope. 

A second  picture  of  the  Spanish  School  is  a “ St. 
Jerome  in  Penitence,”  by  Mateo  Cerezo,  noted  for 
his  pictures  of  the  Conception  which  are  found  in 
many  Spanish  churches.  This  canvas  was  shown 
in  the  annual  exhibition  of  the  Academy  in  1818. 

In  the  Field  Collection,  which  hangs  in  the  Print 
Room,  is  a fine  work,  a sketch  by  Paolo  Veronese 


* 


VIRGIN  AND  CHILD. 
By  Benozzo  Gozzoli. 


Ube  ©lb  Masters 


157 


(1528-1588),  one  of  the  greatest  of  the  Venetian 
painters  of  the  Renaissance.  The  subject  is  “ St. 
John  the  Baptist,”  the  composition  being  similar  to 
the  large  finished  canvas  of  the  same  subject  in  the 
Villa  Borghese.  The  sketch  is  small  — sixteen 
by  twenty  — but  the  composition  is  powerful  and 
satisfying,  and  the  painting,  though  but  a sketch, 
is  thoroughly  characteristic  of  the  greatness  and 
grandeur  of  this  mighty  painter. 

In  the  same  collection  is  represented  Benozzo 
Gozzoli  (1420-1498),  a Florentine  painter  of  the 
fifteenth  century,  and  a student  of  Fra  Angelico. 
His  most  important  work  was  the  decoration  of  the 
Campo  Santo  in  Pisa,  consisting  of  twenty-four 
designs,  upon  which  he  worked,  aided  by  assistants, 
for  sixteen  years.  The  Academy’s  example  of  the 
work  of  this  master  is  a “ Virgin  and  Child,”  done 
in  tempera,  in  the  manner  of  the  frescoes  of  the 
period.  It  is  a beautiful  and  extremely  interesting 
work  of  art. 

Included  in  the  Field  bequest  is  also  a charm- 
ing canvas,  entitled  “ Virgin  ” by  Francesco  di 
Marco  di  Giacomo  Raibolini  (Francia),  (1450- 
1517),  the  painter  of  first  importance  in  the 
Bolognese  School.  Francia,  as  he  is  familiarly 
called,  acquired  a great  reputation  for  his  designs 
in  silver  and  gold  and  was  appointed  by  the  Prince 
of  Bologna,  Master  of  the  Mint,  an  office  which  he 


158  pennspipaitia  Bcafcems  of  fine  arts 


held  until  his  death.  In  his  own  day  he  was  better 
known  as  a goldsmith  than  a painter. 

In  1508  he  came  under  the  influence  of  Raphael. 
Of  his  frescoes  only  two  remain,  much  retouched, 
in  the  Oratory  of  St.  Cecilia  at  Bologna.  His  easel 
pictures  and  portraits  in  oil  are  numerous,  and 
show  the  tendencies  of  Perugino  and  Raphael  so 
strongly,  that  many  have  been  confounded  with  the 
work  of  these  painters.  Vasari  says  of  Francia, 
that  he  was  reverenced  as  a god  in  Bologna.  The 
Academy’s  little  canvas  is  in  the  serene  and  beauti- 
ful style  characteristic  of  both  Perugino  and 
Francia.  It  shows  simply  the  bust  of  the  Virgin, 
who,  garbed  in  the  traditional  blue,  faces  front  with 
her  head  slightly  tipped  to  the  side.  The  composi- 
tion is  fragmentary,  and  suggests  having  been  cut 
down  from  a larger  picture. 

“ The  Last  Supper,”  by  Bonifazio  Veronese,  the 
elder,  is  one  of  the  minor  works  of  the  Field  Collec- 
tion, being  a mere  sketch  on  a canvas  eighteen  by 
thirty-five.  The  painter,  as  his  name  indicates,  was 
bom  in  Verona,  about  1490  and  died  in  1540.  He 
was  a pupil  of  Palma  Vecchio.  His  works  are  to 
be  seen  in  most  Italian  galleries,  also  at  Dresden, 
Vienna,  St.  Petersburg  and  Paris. 

Two  quaint  and  ancient  looking  canvases  by 
Giovanni  Paolo  Pannini  (1694-1764),  were  pre- 
sented by  Mrs.  John  Ford,  the  donor  of  some  of 


Ube  ©lb  toasters 


159 


the  Sullys.  These  are  a pair  of  landscapes  entitled 
“ Banditti  among  Antique  Ruins.”  Pannini  was  a 
follower  of  Salvator  Rosa. 

Amongst  the  canvases  purchased  from  Robert 
Fulton  in  1813,  are  “ Death  of  Abel,”  and  “ Adam 
and  Eve,”  by  Carlo  Loti  (1632-1698),  a pupil  of 
Caravaggio  and  of  Liberi. 

The  Academy  preserves  examples  of  several  of 
the  noted  painters  of  the  French  school.  Amongst 
these  is  an  allegorical  composition  by  that  distin- 
guished painter  of  the  court  of  Louis  XIV,  Charles 
Le  Brun  (1619-1690).  This  is  from  the  Annual 
Exhibition  of  1819,  and  represents  “Time  and 
Truth  Correcting  Love,”  done  in  Le  Brun’s  some- 
what heavy  and  laboured  style,  and  unimaginative 
colouring.  Le  Brun’s  importance  as  the  head  of  the 
French  School  seems  to  have  been  entirely  super- 
imposed. What  ability  he  had  was  not  of  the  in- 
spired order,  though  he  had  an  unending  capacity 
for  work.  Louis  XIV  elevated  him  far  beyond  his 
spiritual  deserts,  though  as  an  executive  head  he 
was  eminently  fitted  to  direct  the  decorating  of  the 
monarch’s  palace  at  Versailles.  He  took  a prin- 
cipal part  in  the  foundation  of  the  French  Acad- 
emy and  was  the  first  director  of  the  Gobelins  manu- 
factory, painting  meanwhile  for  his  royal  patron 
and  designing  fountains,  statues  and  the  whole  series 
of  decorations  for  the  palace.  His  work  shows  the 


160  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  ot  fftne  Brts 


influences  which  his  early  training  imposed.  He 
studied  with  his  father,  a sculptor  and  with  a painter 
named  Perrier.  Poussin  also  is  partially  responsible 
for  the  dulness  of  his  style,  for  Le  Brun  accom- 
panied him  to  Italy  in  1642,  and  doubtless  formed 
himself  after  the  severe  and  classic  traditions  of  this 
artist,  the  most  eminent  of  the  French  painters  of  the 
seventeenth  century. 

Jacques  Louis  David  (1748-1825),  the  court 
painter  of  Napoleon,  is  represented  by  a “ Samson 
and  Delilah,”  shown  during  the  painter’s  lifetime 
at  the  Academy  in  1816.  The  subject  is  treated 
according  to  the  traditions,  showing  Delilah  as  a 
dangerously  beautiful  brunette,  and  Samson  as  a 
young  Hercules  in  the  act  of  being  shorn  of  his 
heavy  locks. 

The  four  large  canvases  by  Claude  Joseph  Vernet 
(1714-1789)  which  were  purchased  from  the  Bona- 
parte collection,  at  the  famous  sale  of  the  possessions 
of  the  former  King  of  Italy,  in  Bordentown,  Sep- 
tember 1 7 and  18,  1845,  have  escaped  the  vicissi- 
tudes of  time  and  fire,  and  are  still  included  in  the 
Academy’s  collection. 

They  are  entitled  respectively,  “ The  Royal  Fam- 
ily of  Naples  at  Portici,”  “ Shipwreck,”  “ Marine,” 
and  “ Marine.”  The  first  is  signed  on  the  front, 
with  the  date,  1746,  and  includes  the  portraits  above 
mentioned,  with  a castle  and  a village  in  the  dis- 


Ube  ©lb  /ibasters 


161 


tancs.  They  represent  the  somewhat  dry  method 
of  idealistic  painting  in  vogue  at  the  time  that  they 
were  done.  Louis  XV  commissioned  the  painter 
to  make  a series  of  twenty  pictures  of  French  sea- 
ports, but,  owing  to  the  war  with  England,  only 
sixteen  were  finished ; these  are  now  in  the  Louvre. 

The  collection  of  British  pictures  includes  a 
charming  portrait  of  Angelica  Kauffman  (1741- 
1807)  painted  by  herself;  a delightful  work  of  art, 
and  a representative  canvas  by  this  able  portrait 
painter.  The  picture  was  first  shown  in  the  first 
annual  exhibition  of  the  Academy,  in  18 11,  and 
presented  to  the  institution,  in  1817,  by  Mrs.  Eliza- 
beth Powell. 

Angelica  Kauffman  was  born  in  Schwartzenburg, 
in  the  Bregenzer  Wald,  though  she  is  always  classed 
as  belonging  to  the  British  School  of  painters,  and 
was  indeed  one  of  the  original  members  of  the 
Royal  Academy.  She  spent  most  of  her  life  abroad 
and  in  1782  married  Antonio  Zucchi,  a Venetian 
painter,  and  adopted  Rome  as  her  permanent  resi- 
dence. 

John  Hoppner  (1758-1810)  is  represented  by  an 
admirable  portrait  of  William  Pitt,  a bust,  facing 
right.  Hoppner  was  a choir  boy  in  one  of  the  royal 
chapels,  and  the  king,  whose  natural  son  he  was 
alleged  to  be,  made  him  an  allowance.  He  entered 
the  schools  of  the  Royal  Academy  in  1775,  and 


162  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  jftne  Brts 


became  an  Academician  in  17^5.  Hoppner  was  por- 
trait painter  to  the  Prince  of  Wales  and  a rival  of 
Sir  Thomas  Lawrence. 

With  the  Carey  Collection  came  a “ Landscape,” 
by  George  Morland  (1763-1804),  one  of  the  most 
distinguished  landscape  painters  of  the  eighteenth 
century  in  England.  The  example  in  this  collection 
is  a small  one  — fifteen  by  eighteen  — exhibiting 
those  peaceful  qualities  of  English  rural  life  which 
it  was  the  custom  to  portray  in  those  days  of  formal 
landscape  painting,  before  Constable  marked  the 
path  to  nobler  and  greater  truths. 

Two  interesting  canvases  by  John  Opie  (1761- 
1807),  a distinguished  Londoner,  are  included  in  the 
collection.  The  first  of  these  is  an  amusing  portrait 
of  Mrs.  Elizabeth  Davy,  of  Devonshire,  England, 
which  shows  the  immense  cleverness  of  this  painter 
of  portraits.  The  second  is  a romantic  subject  — 
“ Gil  Bias  Securing  the  Cook  in  the  Robbers’  Cave,” 
which  was  presented  by  Paul  Beck  in  1842. 

Another  early  English  landscape  painter,  repre- 
sented in  the  department  of  British  artists,  is 
Richard  Wilson  (1714-1782),  whose  “Falls  of 
Tivoli  ” and  “ Landscape  Study  ” came  to  the  Acad- 
emy with  the  Carey  Collection.  Wilson  was  one  of 
the  thirty-six  original  members  of  the  Royal  Acad- 
emy in  1768,  and  was  made  its  librarian  in  1776. 

Daniel  Maclise,  J.  Kenny  Meadows,  James  Baker 


Ube  ©lb  jflbasters 


163 


Pyne  and  William  Clarkson  Stanfield,  R.  A.,  are 
three  painters  of  the  nineteenth  century  school  of 
British  artists  represented  in  the  Carey  Collection, 
which,  as  has  been  mentioned,  is  largely  composed 
of  works  of  the  romanticists. 


CHAPTER  X 


CONTEMPORARY  FOREIGN  PAINTINGS 

Of  contemporary  French  painting,  the  Academy 
possesses  an  example  in  the  large  dramatic  canvas, 
depicting  “ Orestes  Pursued  by  the  Furies,”  by 
William  Adolphe  Bouguereau  (1825-1905), 
painted  in  1862  and  presented  to  the  Academy  by 
Mrs.  Joseph  Harrison  in  1878.  The  painting  is 
one  of  the  most  powerful  of  the  subjects  painted 
by  this  artist,  who  is  best  known  as  a painter  of 
Madonnas.  The  subject  follows  the  mythological 
story  of  Orestes,  the  son  of  Agamemnon  and  Cly- 
taemnestra.  According  to  the  Homeric  story  he 
was  absent  from  Mycenae  when  his  father  returned 
from  the  Trojan  War  and  was  murdered  by  TEgis- 
thus,  the  lover  of  Clytaemnestra.  Eight  years  later 
Orestes  returns  from  Athens  and  revenges  his 
father’s  death  by  slaying  his  mother  and  her  para- 
mour. After  the  deed  he  goes  mad,  and  is  pursued 
by  the  Erinyes,  female  divinities,  avengers  of  in- 
iquity. 

In  his  picture  of  the  story,  Bouguereau  repre- 
sents Orestes,  nude,  running  distracted  away  from 

164 


ORESTES  PURSUED  BY  THE  FURIES. 
By  William  Adolphe  Bouguereau, 


. ■ 





Contemporary  jforetgn  paintings  165 


the  three  Furise  to  which,  in  later  times,  their  num- 
ber was  limited  — Alecto,  the  unresting ; Megaera, 
the  jealous;  and  Tisiphone,  the  avenger.  Their 
hair  is  intertwined  with  serpents  and  the  foremost 
Fury  carries  a torch,  while  the  last  one  supports  in 
her  arms  the  dead  form  of  Clytaemnestra,  and  all 
three  point  to  the  dagger  which  has  pierced  her 
heart.  The  picture  is  full  of  action  and  allows  a 
full  scope  to  the  painter’s  facility  in  the  painting  of 
the  nude. 

The  full-length  portrait  of  Helena  Modjeska 
Chlapowski,  the  celebrated  Polish  tragedienne,  is  a 
fine  example  of  the  work  of  Carolus  Duran 
(1837-  ) one  of  the  most  successful  portrait 

painters  of  his  day.  His  “ Dame  au  Gant,”  in  the 
Luxembourg  Collection,  painted  about  nine  years 
earlier  than  the  portrait  of  Modjeska,  is  still  one 
of  the  important  pictures  of  that  gallery,  though 
Duran  has  outlived  his  popularity.  He  is  now  at 
the  head  of  the  American  Academy  at  Rome. 

The  Academy’s  canvas  has  distinction  and 
charm.  It  shows  the  actress,  standing,  costumed 
in  grey  velvet,  the  figure  in  profile  and  the  graceful 
head  turned  toward  the  spectator.  It  was  painted 
for  Mr.  Paris  Haldeman  in  1878,  and  presented  by 
him  to  the  Academy  in  1883. 

A small  group  of  landscapes  of  the  Barbizon 
School  came  to  the  Academy  as  the  bequest  of  Dr. 


166  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


Francis  W.  Lewis,  a former  member  of  the  Board. 
These  include  a “ River  Scene:  South  of  France,” 
by  Corot,  of  the  same  general  character  as  the  Corot 
of  the  Gibson  Collection,  though  scarcely  its  equal, 
and  a “ Twilight  on  the  Seine,”  by  Daubigny, 
painted  in  1863.  Other  pictures  bequeathed  by  Dr. 
Lewis  are,  “ Top  of  the  Grimsel  Pass,”  by  Alex- 
andre Calame;  “ Landscape:  France,”  by  Emile 
Lambinet;  “Snow  Scene,”  by  Ludvig  Munthe; 
“ Study  of  a Cobbler,”  by  Tony  Offermans;  “ Child 
Sleeping,”  by  Christian  Schiissele ; “ Landscape,” 
by  Paul  Desire  Trouillebert ; and  “View  on  the 
Grand  Canal,”  by  Felix  Ziem. 

In  the  Field  Collection  is  a crayon  drawing,  “ A 
Court  Yard,”  by  Thomas  Couture,  and  a tiny 
“ Landscape,”  by  Rousseau,  the  latter  painted  in 
1851,  and  very  interesting.  As  the  bequest  of 
Harrison  Earl,  in  1894,  came  a number  of  works 
by  foreign  painters.  Amongst  these  is  “ Castle  on 
the  Rhine,”  by  Charles  Hoguet;  “ Interior  of  a 
Stable,”  by  Henrietta  Ronner ; “ Cattle  in  a Stable,” 
by  Adolph  Vogt  and  “ Market  Scene  by  Moon  and 
Candle  Light,”  by  Petrus  van  Schendel. 

Joseph  E.  Temple  was  the  donor  of  several  im- 
portant pictures,  of  which  the  most  prominent  is  an 
immense  canvas  by  Charles  Hermans  (1839-  ) a 

well  known  Belgian  artist,  Chevalier  of  the  Order 
of  Leopold  and  Chevalier  of  the  Order  of  Franz 


Contemporary  Jordan  painting  167 


Joseph  of  Austria.  This  is  a scene  of  festivity  en- 
titled “ Masked  Ball  at  the  Opera  House,”  contain- 
ing numerous  figures,  painted  with  facility.  A 
large  canvas  by  Alexandre  Struys,  a Belgian,  pro- 
fessor in  the  Academy  at  Weimar,  and  Chevalier 
of  the  Order  of  the  White  Falcon  of  Saxony,  in- 
dulges in  the  lugubrious  title  of  “ Forgotten,”  and 
represents  a handsome  woman,  in  sixteenth  cen- 
tury German  costume,  sitting  in  a great  carved  oak 
chair  in  an  attitude  of  intense  and  unhappy  thought. 
This  was  presented  by  Mr.  Temple  in  1882. 

An  interesting  example  of  the  work  of  an  Italian 
painter  of  the  last  century  is  the  large  canvas  en- 
titled “ Caesar  Borgia  and  Macchiavelli,”  which  ob- 
tained for  the  painter  a gold  medal  at  Paris  in  1866, 
and  excited  warm  admiration  at  the  Universal  Ex- 
position in  the  Champs  de  Mars  of  1867.  It  was 
presented  to  the  Academy  by  thirty-six  subscribing 
friends  of  the  institution,  in  1870.  The  artist  was 
Federigo  Faruffini  (1833-1870),  a native  of  Sesto, 
San  Giovanni,  near  Milan.  The  picture  represents 
the  Duke  of  Valentinois  receiving  Macchiavelli, 
who,  in  the  year  1502,  was  sent  to  the  camp  of 
Cesare  Borgia,  to  wait  upon  him  and  to  watch  him. 
From  what  remains  of  the  official  letters  of  the 
Italian  Statesman  we  learn  that  Macchiavelli  con- 
ceived the  strongest  admiration  for  Cesare’s  com- 
bination of  audacity  with  diplomatic  prudence,  for 


168  K>enttSEix>ania  Hcafcemg  of  fine  Brts 


his  adroit  use  of  cruelty  and  fraud,  for  his  self- 
reliance,  avoidance  of  half  measures,  employment 
of  native  troops  and  firm  administration  in  con- 
quered provinces. 

The  interview  takes  place  in  a lofty  room  with  a 
large  leaded  glass  window,  before  which  is  seated 
Macchiavelli,  his  legs  encased  in  red  silk  hose  and 
the  famous  sarcastic  smile  upon  his  lips.  The  Car- 
dinal is  seated  to  the  right,  bending  forward  in  an 
ingratiating  attitude,  his  two  hands  joined  together 
at  the  finger  tips.  There  is  something  infinitely 
effeminate  and  fawning  in  his  manner,  and  he  looks 
capable  of  all  his  cruelties.  Though  not  a great 
masterpiece,  the  picture  possesses  much  strength  of 
composition  and  drawing,  while  the  character  ren- 
dering is  excellent. 

“ A Breton  Peasant  Boy  ” is  a distinguished 
and  representative  canvas  by  Dagnan  Bouveret 
( 1852-  ),  presented  by  twelve  friends  of  the  Acad- 

emy, in  1906.  The  artist  was  bom  in  Paris  and 
studied  under  Gerome.  He  has  received  all  the 
honours  that  the  French  Government  has  to  bestow 
upon  painters,  and  has  been  much  appreciated  in  this 
country.  The  “ Breton  Peasant  Boy  ” is  a beauti- 
fully painted  canvas  exhibiting  subtle  values,  ex- 
quisite colour  and  interesting  light  effect.  The 
young  peasant  is  portrayed  in  a simple  but  effective 
costume,  in  which  the  prevailing  scheme  of  colour 


A BRETON  PEASANT  BOY. 
Bv  Dasnan-Bouveret. 


Contemporary  ^foreign  paintings  169 


is  grey,  black  and  white.  There  is  no  special  effort 
at  portraiture,  yet  the  work  is  strong  in  character 
and  shows  that  the  model  has  been  carefully  studied. 
The  whole  canvas  is  in  beautiful  harmony  and 
strikes  essentially  the  modern  note. 

The  donors  of  the  picture  were  Messrs.  E.  Bur- 
gess Warren,  William  L.  Elkins,  George  D. 
Widener,  John  T.  Morris,  Clarence  H.  Clark,  John 
H.  Converse,  Charles  C.  Harrison,  Edward  T. 
Stotesbury,  Edward  H.  Coates  and  the  Misses 
Blanchard. 

An  interesting  canvas  is  that  of  “ The  Duke  of 
Este  Meditating  the  Death  of  his  Wife,  Parisina,” 
by  Andre  Gastaldi  (1819-1889),  who  was  a 
native  of  Turin,  Italy,  and  professor  of  painting  in 
the  Academic  Albertine  des  Beaux  Arts,  of  that 
city.  The  subject  is  taken  from  Byron’s  poem, 
“ Parisina,”  a poem  founded  upon  a circumstance 
in  Gibbon’s  “ Antiquities  of  the  House  of  Bruns- 
wick.” The  following  extract  will  explain  the  facts 
upon  which  the  story  is  founded.  The  name  of  Azo 
is  substituted  for  Nicholas,  in  the  poem,  as  more 
metrical  : 

“ Under  the  reign  of  Nicholas  III,  Ferrara  was 
polluted  with  a domestic  tragedy.  By  the  testimony 
of  an  attendant,  and  his  own  observation,  the  Mar- 
quis of  Este  discovered  the  incestuous  loves  of  his 
wife,  Parisina,  and  Hugo,  his  bastard  son,  a beauti- 


170  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


ful  and  valiant  youth.  They  were  beheaded  in  the 
castle  by  the  sentence  of  a father  and  husband, 
who  published  his  shame  and  survived  their  exe- 
cution. He  was  unfortunate,  if  they  were  guilty; 
if  they  were  innocent,  he  was  still  more  unfortunate; 
nor  is  there  any  possible  situation  in  which  I can 
sincerely  approve  the  last  act  of  justice  of  a parent.” 

In  the  poem  Byron  recounts  that  awaking  in  the 
night,  the  Marquis  of  Este  — whom  he  calls  Azo  — 
hears  his  wife  murmuring  of  her  love  for  Hugo, 
and  the  exact  part  pictured  by  the  painter  is  as 
follows : — 

“ He  pluck’d  his  poniard  from  its  sheath, 

But  sheath’d  it  ere  the  point  was  bare  — 

Howe’er  unworthy  now  to  breathe, 

He  could  not  slay  a thing  so  fair  — 

At  least,  not  smiling — sleeping — there  — 

Nay  more  : — he  did  not  wake  her  then, 

But  gazed  upon  her  with  a glance 
Which,  had  she  roused  her  from  her  trance, 

Had  frozen  her  sense  to  sleep  again  — 

And  o’er  his  brow  the  burning  lamp 
Gleam’d  on  the  dew-drops  big  and  damp. 

She  spake  no  more  — but  still  she  slumber’d  — 

While,  in  his  thought,  her  days  are  number’d.” 

The  picture  received  a medal  at  the  Paris  Ex- 
position of  1855,  and  was  purchased  by  the  Acad- 
emy in  1867. 

A wonderfully  expressive  sketch  called  “ The 


THE  DUKE  OF  ESTE  MEDITATING  THE  DEATH  OF  HIS  WIFE, 
PARISINA. 

By  Andre  Gastaldi. 


Contemporary  foreign  paintings  171 


Model,”  by  Fortuny,  was  presented  by  Mr.  Edward 
H.  Coates  in  1890.  It  is  an  excellent  example  of 
Fortuny’s  free  use  of  water  colour. 

Among  the  recent  acquisitions  is  a pastel  by  Gas- 
ton La  Touche,  entitled  “ Souvenir  d’Espagne,”  and 
a water  colour  study  of  heads,  “ A Brittany 
Peasant,”  by  Lucien  Simon,  both  artists  representa- 
tive of  the  Salon  art  of  to-day. 


CHAPTER  XI 


THE  GIBSON  COLLECTION 

The  Gibson  Collection,  for  many  years  the  pri- 
vate collection  of  the  late  Henry  C.  Gibson,  who  at 
his  death  bequeathed  it  to  the  Academy,  contains 
a number  of  notable  works  of  foreign  schools,  all 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  by  artists  who  had  their 
vogue  during  the  life-time  of  the  collector. 

The  collection,  numbering  ninety-eight  paintings 
and  five  pieces  of  sculpture,  represents  the  indi- 
vidual taste  of  a cultivated  amateur,  who  patron- 
ized liberally  the  art  of  his  own  day,  but  who 
bought  for  the  pure  pleasure  that  pictures  afforded 
to  his  aesthetic  sense  in  the  adornment  of  his  house, 
rather  than  from  a special  interest  in  any  particular 
school.  Each  work  must  therefore  be  considered 
on  its  individual  merits  and  not  for  its  place  in  the 
development  of  a specialty. 

While  the  collection  is  not  of  one  school,  it  is  all 
of  one  epoch  and  furnishes,  in  consequence,  an  in- 
teresting comparison  between  some  of  the  contem- 
porary painters  of  France,  Germany,  Italy,  Spain 
and  America,  of  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. 


172 


THE  RETURN  OF  THE  FLO; 
By  Jean  Frangois  Millet. 


Ube  (Btbson  Collection 


173 


That  French  pictures  predominate  is  natural,  and 
we  find  several  rather  fine  examples  of  the  Barbison 
School.  Of  these,  the  most  noteworthy  is  “ The 
Return  of  the  Flock,”  by  Jean  Frangois  Millet 
(1814-1875),  a genuine  masterpiece  by  this,  the 
most  profound  of  the  nineteenth  century  painters 
in  France. 

The  picture  is  as  fine  an  example  of  Millet’s 
powerful  studies  of  humanity  in  its  relation  to 
nature  as  is  to  be  found  in  any  gallery,  not  except- 
ing the  Louvre  itself.  Overtaken  by  night,  a shep- 
herd, wrapped  deep  in  his  great  cloak,  occupies  the 
foreground,  with  a tremendous  sense  of  coming 
forward,  followed  by  the  undulating  flock,  huddled 
together,  for  it  is  cold.  A shaggy  sheep  dog 
watches,  in  a professional  alert  way,  the  order  of 
the  sheep,  and  the  sky  is  lit  with  the  last  rays  of 
the  setting  sun. 

The  scene  is  painted  with  simple,  earnest  feeling, 
overs  wept  with  a magnificent  sense  of  nature,  a 
marvellous  comprehension  of  the  facts  of  the  funda- 
mental soil,  to  which  is  added  a dignity,  a pathos 
and  a grace  never  before  approached.  His  con- 
temporary Jacques  very  aptly  compares  him  to 
Daumier,  in  his  great  style  of  constructive  drawing 
and  wonderful  breadth  of  treatment.  He  is  like  a 
great  solemn  creator,  a person  never  concerned,  like 
his  compatriot  Corot,  with  the  pure  joy  of  living, 


174  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  fine  Brts 


but  dealing  always  with  the  big  facts  of  life  and  of 
nature.  His  landscapes  are  as  constructive  as  his 
figures  and  have  ever  an  integral  part  in  the  emo- 
tion of  the  picture  — are  never  super-imposed. 

Millet  was  the  one  great  man  of  his  generation 
who  was  par  excellence  touched  by  the  genuine  feu 
sacre.  His  was  the  dominant  personality  of  the 
century  — a genius  bared  of  all  the  clever  attribu- 
tions of  his  fellows  — forging  its  own  destiny,  in 
its  own  way,  silent  — unconscious  — inevitable. 

“ The  Potato  Harvest  ” is  an  excellent  example 
of  the  work  of  Millet’s  distinguished  contemporary, 
Jules  Breton  (1827-  ),  who  looked  at  nature  with 

less  poetry,  with  a more  photographic  eye.  In 
Breton  one  feels  a more  academic  draughtsman  — 
a more  perfectly  rounded  and  symmetrical  artist 
who  does  all  things  well  — a perfect  craftsman. 
There  is  less  temperament  in  his  work  than  in  that 
of  Millet,  more  of  the  conscious  dramatist. 

“ The  Potato  Harvest,”  familiar  through  the 
etching  of  it  by  Bracquemond,  depicts  an  episode 
in  the  daily  life  of  peasants.  A kneeling  woman 
empties  potatoes  from  a basket  into  a large  sack, 
held  by  another.  The  figures  are  massive  and  sculp- 
turesque, well  fitted  for  the  labour  imposed  upon 
them. 

The  painter  that  stands  best  by  comparison  with 
Millet,  that  can  measure  his  full  height  in  the 


Gbe  Gibson  Collection 


175 


presence  of  this  stupendous  standard,  is  Jean  Bap- 
tiste Camille  Corot  (1796-1875).  And  this  for  the 
best  of  reasons,  simply  that  there  is  no  comparison. 
If  Millet  was  the  pacemaker  in  his  direction, 
dwarfing  all  those  who  trespassed  upon  his  chosen 
field,  Corot  was  no  less  distinct  a personality,  no 
less  an  individual.  The  Academy  is  fortunate  in 
the  possession  of  the  small  canvas  which  came  to 
it  with  the  Gibson  Collection.  In  America,  which 
has  proved  so  receptive  a market  for  the  spurious 
of  the  Barbison  School  of  paintings,  the  eye  has 
become  so  filled  with  the  forgeries  which  abound, 
that  this  little  masterpiece  of  undoubted  authen- 
ticity comes  like  a revelation  of  the  true  genius  and 
power  of  the  painter. 

It  is  a small  canvas,  fourteen  by  eighteen  inches, 
entitled  simply  “ Landscape,”  but  it  gives  a fine 
sense  of  Corot’s  peculiar  charm  in  the  joyous  ex- 
pression of  the  sensation  of  early  morning,  the 
delicious  damp  of  the  French  atmosphere  — its 
wonderful  greys,  its  pearly  mists,  its  delicate  greens 
and  the  quality  and  variety  of  the  clouded  sky.  Its 
luminosity  is  extraordinary,  the  landscape  appears 
to  shimmer  in  the  first  quiver  of  the  awakening 
morning.  The  picture  is  a little  lyric. 

Beside  the  spontaneity  of  Corot’s  art  the  minor 
painters  of  the  Barbison  School  sink  into  relative 
insignificance. 


176  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


The  chef  d’ oeuvre  of  the  collection  is  the  large 
canvas  by  Thomas  Couture  (1815-1879),  originally 
entitled,  “La  Triomphe  d’une  Femme  Equivoque,” 
now  familiarly  catalogued  “ The  Thorny  Path.” 
The  canvas  is  a great  allegorical  composition 
painted  toward  the  end  of  the  painter’s  life,  in  1873, 
and  exhibits  in  the  highest  degree  Couture’s  prin- 
ciples and  manner,  his  strong  and  expressive  draw- 
ing, his  rich,  brilliant  colouring  — those  qualities  of 
opulent  prowess  which  have  caused  him  to  be  likened 
to  Paul  Veronese. 

The  picture  points  a moral  on  the  results  of  a life 
of  pleasure.  The  future  of  the  beautiful  creature, 
who  directs  the  chariot,  is  reflected  in  the  hideous 
old  age  of  the  dame  in  the  rear,  while  the  goal  of 
her  satellites  is  prophesied  in  the  lurching  figure  of 
Silenus,  who  leads  the  van. 

Couture  was  Manet’s  master  and  our  own  Hunt 
was  his  pupil,  in  whose  work  considerable  affinity 
may  be  traced.  He  represents  a curious  middle 
ground  between  his  progenitors.  Ingres,  David,  etc., 
and  his  descendants,  Manet  and  the  whole  school  of 
followers  of  this  radical  genius.  Couture  was  any- 
thing but  radical,  the  truths  of  his  academic  fore- 
bears were  too  deeply  impressed  upon  him  for  him 
ever  to  have  been  able  to  shake  them  off  entirely. 
He  comes  nearer  to  the  modern  note  in  his  head  of 
a “ Roman  Youth  ” in  this  collection,  and  which  was 


THE  GREAT  OAK  OF  ORNANS. 
By  Gustave  Courbet. 


Ube  (Bibson  Collection 


177 


painted  in  1854.  In  this  the  treatment  is  broad, 
with  a strong  sense  of  realism  in  the  vigorous  draw- 
ing and  the  big  masses  into  which  the  modelling  and 
light  effects  are  divided. 

Gustave  Courbet  (1819-1878)  must  be  reckoned 
as  the  strong  factor  in  modern  landscape  work.  He 
is  represented  in  the  collection  by  one  of  his  greatest 
pictures,  “ The  Great  Oak  at  Ornans,”  a powerfully 
painted  tree  of  noble  proportions,  in  whose  rugged 
painting  it  is  easy  to  feel  the  ardent  patriot  — the 
partisan  of  the  Commune  — the  instigator  of  the 
overthrow  of  the  Colonne  Vendome.  Courbet  was 
the  first  pronounced  exponent  of  the  realistic  school, 
whose  work  was  a consistent  protest  against  the 
classic  ideals.  “ Le  beau,  c’est  le  laid  ” was  one  of 
his  favourite  paradoxes,  and  like  all  reactionary 
painters  he  overreached  himself  at  times  in  his  affec- 
tation of  the  gross  and  material  with  which  he 
sought  to  emphasize  his  reliance  upon  the  primary 
elements  of  nature.  While  the  effect  was  not  al- 
ways happy  in  his  figure  painting,  it  would  be  diffi- 
cult to  find  a more  beautiful  picture  than  the  “ Deer 
in  the  Forest  of  Fontainebleau,”  which  is  preserved 
by  the  Musee  du  Louvre. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  even  in  its  excesses  his  in- 
fluence was  healthy.  His  landscapes  have  all  the 
vigour  of  nature  herself,  as  opposed  to  the  studio 
products  of  many  of  his  contemporaries.  His  brush 


178  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


was  broad,  strong  and  uncompromising  and  his 
feeling  for  nature,  a wholesome  sentiment.  Courbet 
has  many  qualities  of  mind  in  common  with  Tho- 
reau  and  has  been  aptly  compared  for  others  to  Walt 
Whitman. 

Ornans  was  his  birthplace  and  many  of  his  can- 
vases were  painted  there.  The  “ Great  Oak  ” is  an 
extraordinary  composition  for  its  time,  but  one 
which  finds  full  appreciation  now.  The  giant  tree 
occupies  nearly  the  whole  of  the  canvas,  the  huge 
trunk  placed  squarely  in  the  centre  and  the  branches 
sweeping  to  each  side.  The  painting  is  broad  and 
simple,  almost  roughly  done,  but  the  effect  is  one 
of  massive  strength.  The  pigment  is  thick  upon 
the  canvas,  laid  on  probably  with  a palette  knife, 
but  there  is  a vigorous  freedom  of  air  and  light 
in  the  picture  and  it  stands  as  one  of  the  strongest 
things  in  the  collection. 

Of  French  landscape  painters,  Rousseau,  Dau- 
bigny, Cazin,  Diaz  and  Dupre  are  represented,  with 
the  conventional  thing  from  their  hands.  Jules 
Dupre  (1812-1889),  was  one  the  most  original 
and  powerful  of  the  painters  of  his  epoch,  among 
the  exponents  of  the  so-called  “ paysage  intime.” 
He  is  represented  by  two  canvases,  “ The  Moor- 
land,” and  “ Marine.”  Dupre  in  his  day  was  con- 
sidered, with  Rousseau,  one  of  the  greatest  colour- 
ists in  landscape  which  the  school  produced.  He 


SEEKING  SHELTER. 
By  Emile  Van  Marcke. 


Ube  (Btbson  Collection 


179 


was  an  early  disciple  of  the  rage  for  “ atmosphere  ” 
in  painting,  a word  which  figured  largely  in  the 
technical  parlance  of  a quarter  of  a century  ago, 
but  which  has  passed  into  disuse.  He  understood 
values,  which  gives  his  paintings  tone  and  depth, 
and  in  his  treatment  of  masses  of  foliage  he  was  so 
skilful  that  without  losing  the  sense  of  weight  and 
density  one  can  feel  the  light  and  air  filtering 
through,  and  moving  in  their  (depths. 

Cattle  scenes  — landscapes  with  cattle  — were 
tremendously  popular  at  the  time  when  the  collec- 
tion was  formed,  and  Mr.  Gibson  possessed  vigor- 
ous examples  of  Try  on,  Van  Marcke,  Sacque  and 
the  two  Bonheurs,  amongst  the  French  painters, 
and  of  Schenck  of  the  Duchy  of  Holstein,  where 
he  had  surely  every  facility  for  studying  the  herds. 

Emile  Van  Marcke  (1827-1890),  was  born  in 
Sevres  and  died  in  Hyeres.  He  was  a pupil  of 
Troyon,  his  compatriot  and  seventeen  years  his 
senior.  The  Gibson  Collection  possesses  two  of 
the  cattle  pieces  of  this  excellent  painter,  of  which 
the  larger,  “ The  Herd,”  is  considered  his  master- 
piece. It  is  signed  on  the  front,  “ Em.  Van  Marcke, 
1869.”  The  smaller  canvas  entitled  “ Seeking 
Shelter,”  has  more  of  the  qualities  which  appeal 
to  the  profession,  and  depicts  a group  of  cattle 
hurrying  before  an  approaching  storm.  It  is  juicy 
in  painting  and  full  of  interest  and  gets  as  far 


180  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  fine  Hrts 


away  as  possible  from  the  academic  style  of  the 
canvases  of  Auguste  Bonheur,  Try  on,  etc.,  in  the 
collection.  The  landscape  is  admirably  painted 
also,  the  whole  story  being  under  one  impulse,  each 
incident  taking  its  just  place  in  a concrete  whole. 

In  the  Rosa  Bonheur,  “ Highland  Sheep,”  the 
cattle  are  painted  with  considerable  interest  and 
accuracy,  but  the  effect  is  cheapened  by  the  intro- 
duction of  a ready-made  background,  of  false 
values  and  insipid  colour  that  has  nothing  to  do 
with  the  picture. 

Roybet,  de  Neuville,  Meissonnier  and  Detaille 
have  each  a place  in  the  collection.  Roybet  gives 
us  a “ Cavalier,”  which  has  more  than  the  usual 
distinguished  quality  of  this  accomplished  painter 
in  little.  It  exceeds  in  interest  the  Meissonnier 
“ Cavalier  Waiting  an  Audience,”  in  somewhat  the 
same  vein. 

Detaille,  a pupil  of  Meissonnier,  and  in  his  day 
the  leading  military  painter  of  France,  is  repre- 
sented by  a characteristic  canvas ; “ Charge  of  the 
Ninth  Regiment  of  Cuirassiers,  Village  of  Mors- 
bronn,  day  of  the  Battle  of  Reichshoffen,  August 
6,  1870.”  It  is  signed  on  the  front,  “ Edouard 
Detaille,  1874.” 

Soldiery  became  his  passion  in  his  boyhood, 
when  he  delighted  to  fashion  corps  of  soldiers  out 
of  pasteboard,  painting  them  with  extraordinary 


Gbe  (Sfbson  Collection 


181 


truth  and  fidelity  as  to  accoutrements  and  arms. 
On  the  breaking  out  of  the  Franco-German  War, 
Detaille  at  once  enlisted  as  a volunteer,  and  during 
the  very  midst  of  battle,  gathered  the  subject  of  a 
picture.  “ The  Charge  of  the  Ninth  Regiment  ” 
was  exhibited  at  the  Salon  of  1874.  The  moment 
seized  for  the  composition  is  when  the  head  of  the 
column  of  cavalry  suddenly  finds  itself  confronted 
by  “ chevaux  de  frise  ” barricading  the  narrow  way 
through  which  the  entire  corps  is  rushing  while 
attacked  on  all  sides  by  hidden  musketry  from  the 
windows  of  the  neighbouring  houses. 

The  moment  is  full  of  excitement,  for  the  main 
body  is  coming  at  top  speed  upon  the  advance 
guard,  halted  by  the  barricade.  There  is  a fatiguing 
correctness  about  the  soldiers  of  Detaille,  which  are 
wanting  in  character,  in  movement  and  in  life. 

“ A Surprise  in  the  Environs  of  Metz,”  by  Al- 
phonse de  Neuville  (1836-1885),  Detaille’s  dis- 
tinguished rival  in  the  field  of  battle  scenes,  was 
painted  in  the  same  year  as  the  Detaille  and  ex- 
hibited in  the  Salon  of  1875. 

A-  favourite  picture  in  the  collection  is  a most 
beautiful  Alfred  Stevens  (1828-1900),  called  “ In 
the  Country,”  one  of  those  delightful  portraits  of 
the  artist’s  model  in  her  yellow  gown  and  carrying 
a Japanese  parasol.  Alfred  Stevens  was  a Belgian 
and  one  of  the  most  popular  of  the  fashionable 


1S2  Pennsylvania  Hcabemy  of  fine  Hrts 


portrait  painters  of  the  last  century.  In  the  private 
collections  of  Brussels  and  Paris  are  to  be  found  the 
chief  treasures  of  his  art.  He  excelled  in  the  paint- 
ing of  beautiful  women. 

The  Academy's  example  is  a very  fine  one  and 
gives  a fair  idea  of  Stevens’  art,  which  was  per- 
sonal. charming,  subtle  and  strong.  That  he  was 
appreciated  in  life  is  amply  attested  in  the  list  of 
medals  and  honours  which  he  received.  France 
made  him  chevalier,  officer  and  commander  of  the 
Legion  of  Honour;  Belgium  conferred  upon  him 
the  honour  of  Commander  of  the  Order  of  Leopold ; 
he  was  Commander  of  the  Austrian  Order  of  Franz 
Joseph  and  held  from  Bavaria  the  Order  of  St 
MicheL 

Yet  Stevens  died  in  great  poverty  at  Ostend, 
where  toward  the  close  of  his  life  — he  lived  to  be 
nearly  eighty  — he  is  said  to  have  eked  out  a 
wretched  livelihood  by  painting  upon  sea  shells 
for  tourists. 

The  short  but  brilliant  career  of  Mariano 
Fortuny  y Carbo  (1838-1874)  filled  the  ears  and 
aroused  the  enthusiasm  of  contemporary  collectors 
of  the  last  century.  The  painter  is  one  of  the  chief 
exponents  of  the  Spanish  school  of  the  middle  of 
the  nineteenth  century.  He  was  bora  in  Rewos, 
Catalonia.  Spain.  June  11,  1838,  and  died  in  Rome, 
November  21,  1874.  His  art  education  was  ac- 


IN  THE  COUNTRY. 
By  Alfred  Stevens. 


Ube  (Bibson  Collection 


183 


quired  at  the  Barcelona  Academy  from  which  he 
won  the  prix  de  Rome  in  1856,  at  the  age  of  twenty 
years.  His  talents  were  versatile  and  he  produced 
oil  paintings,  water  colours,  etchings  or  drawings 
with  equal  facility. 

His  chief  work,  “ Le  Mariage  Espagnol,”  in- 
spired by  the  painter’s  marriage  to  a daughter  of 
Madrazo,  the  director  of  the  Madrid  Museum,  was 
begun  in  Madrid  in  1867  and  finished  in  1869  in 
Rome.  When  shown  in  Paris  the  picture  created 
an  extraordinary  sensation.  There  were  several 
portraits  in  it,  among  them  those  of  Madame  For- 
tuny, the  Duchess  of  Colonna  and  the  artist 
Regnault. 

The  example  in  the  Gibson  Collection,  “ The 
Council  House,  Granada,”  was  painted  in  1872  in 
Granada  where  the  artist  passed  one  of  the  hap- 
piest periods  of  his  life.  The  picture  represents  the 
Casa  de  Ayuntamiento  viejo,  or  ancient  town  hall 
of  Granada,  an  edifice  long  ago  perverted  from  its 
high  uses  to  a fish  market.  The  quaint  Plaza  was 
once  dedicated  to  important  public  fests  and  func- 
tions. The  perfect  harmony  and  rare  brilliancy 
and  colour  of  this  picture  are  characteristic  of  this, 
the  best  and  most  individual  period  of  Fortuny’s 
work.  As  an  architectural  study  the  low  and  pic- 
turesque Moorish  buildings,  with  the  flowering 
plants,  gay  awnings  and  rugs  overhanging  the  bal- 


184  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  ffine  Brts 


conies,  are  most  interesting,  while  the  tiny  figures, 
painted  with  matchless  accuracy  and  skill,  give  local 
colour  to  a scene  typically  Spanish  in  character. 

The  deep  blue  of  the  sky,  the  warm  red  of  the 
chimney  tops,  the  neutral  greys  of  the  rough  cast 
walls,  the  green,  yellow  or  vermilion  placards  on 
the  front  of  the  house,  the  gay  shawls  of  the  women, 
the  shadows  of  the  narrow  street,  are  all  handled 
with  unerring  delicacy  and  power.  Fortuny  re- 
ceived for  the  picture,  which  was  painted  for  Mr. 
Gibson,  forty  thousand  francs  ($8000). 

There  is  a stirring  romance  connected  with  the 
picture,  a mystery  that  was  never  wholly  solved. 
Its  owner,  Mr.  Gibson,  sent  it  in  January,  1877,  to 
The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts,  to 
take  part  in  a loan  exhibition.  This  exhibition 
closed  on  the  last  day  of  March  but  Mr.  Gibson 
allowed  his  pictures  to  remain  on  through  the  regu- 
lar annual  exhibition  of  the  Institution,  which  closed 
on  the  second  of  June.  The  pictures  were  returned, 
and,  according  to  the  records,  Mr.  Gibson  received 
them  in  a darkened  hall  of  the  then  closed  house, 
checking  off  each  canvas  as  it  came  without  closely 
inspecting  it.  As  the  family  were  away  for  the 
summer  the  pictures  were  not  hung  but  were  tem- 
porarily placed  in  a room  and  securely  locked. 

In  the  autumn  when  the  house  was  opened,  the 
first  thing  with  which  Mr.  Gibson  occupied  himself 


Ube  (Btbson  Collection 


185 


was  the  arrangement  of  his  pictures.  On  turning  to 
the  Fortuny,  he  was  at  once  impressed  with  a 
change  in  the  picture  and  closer  inspection  re- 
vealed beyond  the  question  of  a doubt  that  the 
original  had  been  spirited  away  and  a poor  copy 
substituted.  A long  investigation  followed.  The 
curator  of  the  Academy  was  interrogated  and 
finally,  on  being  provided  with  funds  for  search, 
recovered  the  picture  and  restored  it  to  its  rightful 
owner.  His  statement  concerning  its  recovery 
reads  like  the  most  extravagant  fiction,  but  Mr. 
Gibson  rested  content  with  the  regaining  of  his 
treasure  and  nothing  was  done  to  establish  or  dis- 
prove its  verity. 

The  Academy  owns  a second  work  by  Fortuny,  a 
water  colour,  which  is  referred  to  under  the  chapter 
dealing  with  miscellaneous  collections. 

The  Collection  contains  an  excellent  example  of 
the  sombre  style  of  Mihaly  Munkacsy,  in  his 
“ Bringing  in  the  Night  Rovers,”  signed  on  the 
front  and  dated  1881 : and  an  interesting  canvas  of 
Georges  Michel  (1763-1843),  “Landscape,”  which 
despite  its  brown  colouring  has  a fine  sky.  He  has 
been  called  the  forerunner  of  Rousseau  and  referred 
to  as  “ a genius  long  misunderstood  and  first  made 
known  to  the  wider  circles  of  the  world  by  the  Paris 
Exposition  of  1889.”  One  must  have  seen  his 
greater  canvases  to  get  much  pleasure  out  of  this 


186  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


rather  unimportant  example  in  the  Gibson  Collec- 
tion, but  it  is  interesting  to  know  that  Mr.  Gibson 
was  alive  to  the  painter’s  importance. 

There  are  a number  of  small  unimportant  can- 
vases in  the  collection  which  do  credit  to  the  taste 
of  the  collector.  Amongst  these  may  be  mentioned, 
a charming  Boldini,  a delightful  coast  scene  by 
Boudin;  a Fromentin,  a Gerome,  two  Henners;  a 
Wilhelm  von  Kaulbach,  now  hopelessly  demode, 
but  once  the  admiration  of  the  civilized  world;  a 
Cesare  Maccari,  “ The  Model,”  a really  spirited  little 
bit  of  genre  painting;  a Francesco  Paola  Michetti, 
“ Peasant  Girl,”  in  his  light  Italian  style,  that  is  very 
pleasing;  and  a tiny  canvas  of  James  Jacques  Tis- 
sot,  called  “ The  Reverie,”  that  is  almost  equal  to 
a Stevens  for  its  compelling  personality  and  delight- 
ful roundness  of  forms. 

A picture  by  Baron  Hendrik  Leys,  a Belgian 
who  was  born  in  Antwerp  in  1815  and  died  there 
in  1869,  is  an  interesting  example  in  poor  condition, 
by  the  last  of  the  Dutch  or  Flemish  painters  who 
preserved  the  traditions  of  the  early  masters  of 
that  locality. 

There  are  three  Americans  represented  in  the 
collection : Stuart,  Sully  and  Rothermel.  The 

Stuart  is  the  portrait  of  Colonel  Isaac  Franks,  the 
aide-de-camp  of  Washington,  which  is  referred 
to  in  the  chapter  on  the  Stuart  Collection,  with 


Ube  (Mbson  Collection 


187 


which  it  has  been  placed.  The  Sully  is  an  unim- 
portant canvas  of  the  sentimental  variety  entitled, 
“ Child  Reposing,”  and  the  Rothermel  is  the  best 
of  the  six  canvases  of  this  artist  which  the  institu- 
tion possesses. 

Peter  Frederick  Rothermel  (1817-1895),  was 
born  in  Neiscopec,  Lucerne  County,  Pennsylvania. 
He  devoted  himself  with  best  success  to  the  paint- 
ing of  historical  subjects  and  was  a portrait  painter 
of  some  parts.  Bass  Otis  was  his  instructor  and 
he  spent  also  some  years  abroad  in  the  study  of 
his  profession. 

His  canvas  in  this  collection  is  “ State  House  on 
the  Day  of  the  Battle  of  Germantown,”  which  was 
painted  in  1862.  His  style  was  photographic  and 
his  colour  suggests  the  chromo,  but  he  was  at  one 
time  much  in  vogue  as  an  exponent  of  the  senti- 
mental, the  tragic  and  the  pathetic  in  art. 

In  1910  the  Academy  received  what  was  virtually 
an  important  addition  to  the  Gibson  Collection  in 
the  bequest  of  thirteen  oil  paintings  from  Caroline 
Gibson  Tait,  a sister  of  Mr.  Gibson.  These  have 
been  hung  in  an  adjoining  room,  and  are  of  the 
same  general  character  as  those  in  the  main  collec- 
tion. 


CHAPTER  XII 


SCULPTURE 

Though  the  Academy,  according  to  its  charter, 
was  above  all  consecrated  to  the  uses  of  sculpture, 
its  sculpture  department  is  less  remarkable  than 
other  collections  in  the  institution. 

It  possesses  very  few  genuine  antiques.  Over  the 
main  door  outside  is  the  colossal,  mutilated  statue 
of  Ceres  in  marble,  referred  to  in  the  opening 
chapter,  brought  from  Melagra,  Greece,  and  pre- 
sented by  Commodore  Daniel  F.  Patterson  in  1828. 

There  are  four  delightful  Tanagra  figurines,  mor- 
tuary sculptures  from  Tanagra  in  Boeotia,  Greece, 
where  they  were  discovered  about  1872.  These 
were  presented  by  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Fairman  Rogers 
in  1879. 

A collection  of  twenty-three  dekadrachms  of  an- 
cient Syracuse,  of  which  the  larger  part  comes  from 
the  “ Santa  Maria  Hoard  ” in  Sicily,  can  only  be 
compared  in  size  and  interest  with  that  in  the  British 
Museum.  All  the  specimens  are  in  remarkable  con- 
dition and  two  are  probably  unique. 

The  tyranny  of  Dyonysius  and  his  successors, 
188 


Sculpture 


189 


about  400  b.  c.,  is  the  age  to  which  belong  these 
splendid  examples  of  Greek  art,  characterized  by 
the  head  of  Proserpine  or  Arethusa,  and  upon  the 
reverse  by  the  flying  quadriga,  above  which  hovers 
Nike  with  outstretched  crown.  The  dekadrachm  of 
Syracuse,  which  is  the  most  glorious  survival  of 
Greek  numismatics,  exhausts  the  refinement  of  pro- 
file relief.  Upon  the  obverse  appear  the  signatures 
of  Evainetos  or  of  Kimon,  who  were  the  designers 
and  cutters  of  the  dies. 

The  beauty  of  the  coins  and  their  completeness 
command  our  admiration,  and  our  interest  is  aroused 
by  the  story  they  tell  of  the  vicissitudes  of  the  city 
of  Syracuse,  the  mother  of  liberty  and  the  slave  of 
tyrants,  great  in  commerce,  rich,  luxurious,  loving 
the  arts,  yet  able  to  defend  herself  even  under  base 
rulers  against  all  the  power  of  Carthage  and  Athens. 
If  nothing  survived  of  all  the  sculpture  of  the  an- 
cients, Greek  coinage  alone  would  demonstrate  that 
the  race  to  which  it  owed  its  existence  was  more 
conversant  with  the  qualities  of  beauty  and  had  a 
finer  spiritual  constitution  than  any  other  race  of 
which  we  have  record. 

The  collection  was  presented  by  Mr.  and  Mrs. 
George  H.  Earle,  Jr.,  in  1899. 

The  earliest  patronage  of  sculpture  in  America 
dates  back  to  1785,  when  the  State  of  Virginia  gave 
to  Jean  Antoine  Houdon  (1741-1828),  the  most 


190  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


famous  living  sculptor  of  France,  a commission  to 
make  portraits  of  Lafayette  and  Washington,  both 
of  which  are  installed  in  the  State  Capitol  at  Rich- 
mond, Virginia. 

For  the  studies  for  the  statue  of  Washington, 
Houdon  crossed  the  ocean  in  1785  at  the  solicitation 
of  Franklin  and  Jefferson  and  spent  two  weeks  in 
Mt.  Vernon  making  studies  of  the  future  President 
and  a life  mask  of  his  features.  It  is  said  that  he 
even  made  a plaster  cast  of  his  entire  person.  Hou- 
don sailed  with  Franklin  from  Havre  on  the  22nd 
of  July,  1785.  He  was  with  Washington  for  fifteen 
days  and  returned  to  France  direct,  reaching  home 
on  January  4th,  1786. 

The  Academy  preserves  a valuable  souvenir  of 
Houdon’s  visits  to  this  country  in  the  remarkable 
portrait  bust  in  plaster  of  John  Paul  Jones,  the 
celebrated  naval  hero  of  the  War  of  the  Revolu- 
tion. 

Houdon  is  known  to  have  made  and  presented 
sixteen  of  these  casts  to  different  people  but  the  one 
owned  by  the  Academy  is  particularly  valuable  as 
being  the  only  one  of  the  sixteen  that  can  be  identi- 
fied. It  was  presented  to  General  William  Irvine,  a 
Pennsylvania  general  in  the  Revolution.  It  is 
signed  under  the  right  shoulder,  “ houdon,  f.  1780.” 

From  the  original  plaster  cast  the  Academy  has 
lately  (1906)  had  made  a bronze  casting  which 


BUST  OF  JOHN  PAUL  JONES. 
By  Jean  Antoine  Houdon. 


. 


* 


Sculpture 


191 


stands  in  the  Gilpin  Gallery  amongst  the  collection 
of  historic  portraits. 

A bust  in  plaster  of  Joel  Barlow,  dated  1804,  is 
a further  example  of  Houdon’s  great  skill  as  a por- 
trait maker.  It  was  exhibited  in  the  Academy’s  ex- 
hibition of  1812,  which  was  the  year  of  Barlow’s 
death. 

The  portrait  was  made  in  1804,  during  Barlow’s 
eight  years  residence  in  France,  where  he  lived  the 
life  of  a man  of  letters,  writing  his  poem  the  “ Co- 
lumbiad,”  and  making  extensive  preparations  for 
a history  of  the  American  Revolution,  and  a work 
on  the  French  Revolution. 

Barlow’s  history  is  interesting.  In  1807  his  epic, 
“ The  Columbiad,”  was  enlarged  and  published  in 
Philadelphia.  In  18 11,  his  country  being  apparently 
on  the  verge  of  a war  with  France,  he  was  prevailed 
upon  to  accept  the  post  of  minister  to  France  and 
went  there  in  the  United  States  Frigate  “ Con- 
stitution.” After  nine  months  diplomacy  he  was 
invited  by  Napoleon  to  meet  him  at  Wilna,  Poland, 
where  the  treaty,  whose  provisions  had  been  agreed 
upon,  would  be  signed.  Barlow  set  out  but  on 
reaching  Wilna  found  the  French  army  in  full  re- 
treat on  the  town  from  Moskow.  Becoming  in- 
volved in  the  retreat,  he  was  overcome  by  cold  and 
privation  and  died  at  Yarmisica,  Poland. 

The  bust  by  Houdon  gives  the  impression  of  a 


192  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  ot  jftne  Hrts 


noble  and  forceful  personality  and  as  a work  of 
art  possesses  all  the  merits  of  strength,  virility  and 
character.  It  is  signed  under  the  right  shoulder, 
“ houdon,  an  XII  ” and  under  the  left,  “ j.  barlow, 
50  ans.” 

The  next  sculptor  to  visit  us  was  an  imaginative 
but  unbalanced  Italian  whose  erratic  career  led  him 
to  the  United  States  in  1791,  where  he  left  a num- 
ber of  works  of  historic  interest. 

Giuseppe  Ceracchi  (1751-1801),  was  born  in 
Rome  and  was  employed  as  a young  man  with 
Canova  upon  sculpture  for  the  Pantheon,  but  jour- 
neyed in  1773  to  England,  where  his  ability  was 
recognized  by  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds  and  other  artists 
of  influence. 

A visit  to  Paris,  and  an  intimacy  with  the  French 
painter  David,  filled  him  with  the  revolutionary 
spirit  then  in  the  air.  Imbued  with  an  enthusi- 
asm for  liberty  and  the  new  Republic,  he  came  to 
America  in  1791  with  a scheme  for  Congress  to 
erect  a monument  to  Liberty  — a colossal  group  one 
hundred  feet  high,  in  marble,  which  was  to  include 
the  Goddess  of  Liberty,  Saturn,  Apollo,  Neptune, 
Mercury  and  allegorical  figures  of  Philosophy, 
National  Valour,  etc. 

The  price  for  this  monument  Ceracchi  fixed  at 
$30,000  and  Washington,  who  suggested  that  the 
money  be  raised  by  private  subscriptions,  headed 


Sculpture 


193 


the  list  with  a circumspect  amount.  As  other  names 
did  not  follow  rapidly,  the  sculptor  returned  to 
France,  after  making  a number  of  portrait  busts  of 
questionable  merit.  On  his  return  he  was  promptly 
guillotined  for  instigating  a conspiracy  against  the 
life  of  Napoleon.  His  portrait,  done  in  miniature 
by  Trumbull,  is  in  the  collection  of  that  artist’s 
works  at  Yale  University. 

Two  marble  busts  attributed  to  him  may  be  seen 
in  the  Pennsylvania  Academy,  a Hamilton  and  a 
Franklin.  The  bust  of  Benjamin  Franklin  was 
purchased  from  Simon  Chandron  in  1811  and  in 
the  old  days  of  the  Academy,  at  Tenth  and  Chest- 
nut Streets,  ornamented  the  stairway  of  the  original 
building. 

The  bust  of  Alexander  Hamilton  is  a copy  in 
marble  of  Ceracchi’s  original  life  study  — made 
and  presented  by  John  Dixey,  a contemporary  of 
Ceracchi  much  interested  in  the  revival  of  the  art 
of  sculpture.  It  is  probably  even  more  dry  and 
heavy  than  the  original. 

At  this  time  one  of  the  earliest  of  those  unrelated 
sparks  of  native  genius  made  its  appearance  in 
Philadelphia  in  the  person  of  William  Rush  (1756- 
1833),  a wood  carver.1 

Philadelphia  contains  a number  of  his  works  of 
which  his  masterpiece  is  the  full-length  statue  of 

1 Vide  page  333. 


194  Pennsylvania  Bcafcetny  of  fine  Brts 


Washington,  in  Independence  Hall.  The  “ Nymph 
of  the  Schuylkill  ” is  evidence  of  Rush’s  ability 
as  an  artist  and  may  be  seen  in  the  form  of  a bronze 
replica  at  the  forebay  of  the  old  Fairmount  Water- 
works in  Fairmount  Park,  whither  it  was  removed 
from  Centre  Square  about  the  year  1820,  or  may 
be  studied  in  Krimmell’s  charming  painting  of  the 
garden  of  Penn  Square,  where,  under  the  more 
familiar  title  of  “ Leda  and  the  Swan,”  it  figures 
as  the  centre  of  interest  in  that  spirited  reflection 
of  the  times. 

The  figure  is  an  allegorical  representation  of  the 
Schuylkill  River,  its  drapery  standing  for  the  little 
waves  of  a wind-sheltered  stream.  It  was  carved 
to  commemorate  the  establishment  of  the  Water- 
works, and  was  placed  in  a circular  basin  in  front 
of  the  engine  house  at  Centre  Square.  This  was  the 
first  fountain  possessed  by  Philadelphia  and  the 
entire  affair  was  considered  a great  novelty  and  one 
of  the  sights  of  the  city.  Rush’s  model  was  Miss 
Vanuxen,  daughter  of  James  Vanuxen,  a merchant, 
who  was  at  that  time,  with  Rush,  a member  of  the 
watering  committee.  She  afterward  married 
Nathan  Smith  and  died  in  1874  at  an  advanced 
age.  She  is  represented  holding  a bittern  upon  her 
right  shoulder.  The  arms  are  gracefully  posed, 
the  left  hand  grasps  one  of  the  feet  of  the  bird  while 
the  right  steadies  a half  lifted  wing.  The  bird  is 


Sculpture 


195 


absurd  enough,  in  all  conscience,  but  the  effect 
must  have  been  charming  when  its  lifted  bill  threw 
a vertical  jet  of  water  which  fell  freely  upon  the 
maiden,  whose  waist  is  encircled  with  rushes  and 
whose  figure  is  one  of  lightness  and  grace.  To  the 
taste  of  the  present  generation  it  seems  unusually 
chaste  in  design  but  it  was  denounced  when  first 
erected  as  immodest. 

The  crucifixes  in  St.  Augustine’s  and  St.  Mary’s 
Churches  are  by  Rush,  and  at  the  Actor’s  Home,  in 
the  suburbs  of  Philadelphia,  are  still  preserved  his 
figures  of  “ Tragedy  ” and  “ Comedy.” 

Rush  was  one  of  the  founders  and  originators 
of  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts, 
and  an  active  director  of  the  institution  until  his 
death.  The  most  important  memento  which  the 
institution  preserves  of  his  genius  is  a plaster 
cast  of  his  portrait  of  himself  carved  from  a pine 
knot,  of  which  the  original  has  long  since  disap- 
peared. 

This  bust  is  an  unique  and  curious  work.  The 
head  is  of  the  strong,  revolutionary  type  and  though 
the  modelling  is  dry  and  literal,  the  character  of  the 
head  is  excellent  and  there  is  no  question  of  its 
truth.  Across  the  shoulders,  in  deference  to 
his  trade,  Rush  has  thrown  a pine  sprig,  its 
needles  mingling  with  the  artist’s  long,  spare 
locks. 


196  pennspipanta  Bca&emp  of  flTne  arts 


Taft  says  of  the  work:  “The  fine  old  head  is 
turned  vigorously  to  the  right,  the  pose  is  strong, 
and  despite  the  grotesqueness  of  the  wood  carvers 
fancy  the  whole  effect  is  one  of  power.  The  draw- 
ing of  the  nose,  the  modelling  of  the  sensitive  mouth 
and  the  fine  chin  and  particularly  the  expression  of 
the  seeing  eyes  are  all  admirable.  ...  In  noting 
the  resemblance  of  this  face  to  certain  military  types 
it  is  interesting  to  find  that  Rush  actually  served  in 
his  youth  in  the  Revolutionary  Army.  He  was  a 
member  of  the  council  of  Philadelphia  for  more 
than  a quarter  of  a century  and  made  his  influence 
felt  in  the  political  and  intellectual  life  of  his  city 
until  the  time  of  his  death,  which  occurred  January 
17,  1833.  It  is  probable  that,  coming  at  the  time 
he  did,  he  accomplished  more  for  sculpture  in  Phila- 
delphia than  any  other  one  man  since  his  day.  His 
talent,  remarkable  as  it  was,  counts  for  less  than 
his  personal  influence.  Though  his  own  sculpture 
was  wrought  largely  in  perishable  materials,  his 
service  to  American  art  is  enduring,  for  in  uniting 
and  crystallizing  the  floating  elements  of  culture 
and  rendering  them  available  he  made  a contribu- 
tion of  permanent  and  ever  increasing  value.”  In 
addition  to  his  own  portrait,  of  which  a bronze 
replica  replaces  the  first  plaster  cast  (which  the 
Academy  of  course  preserves)  in  the  Gilpin  Gallery, 
where  it  figures  in  the  collection  of  historic  portraits, 


Sculpture 


197 


the  Academy  has  lately  become  possessed  of  a 
splendid  cast  of  Rush’s  bust  of  Lafayette,  a strong 
piece  of  character  work.  It  comes  through  the 
Rush  family,  having  been  presented  by  William 
Rush  Duncan  on  May  i,  1911. 

There  is  also  listed  a number  of  portrait  busts  by 
Rush;  “ Portrait  of  a Man,”  busts  of  Dr.  Benjamin 
Rush,  Captain  Lawrence,  Commodore  Bainbridge, 
Dr.  Wistar,  Dr.  Physick  and  Joseph  Wright,  the 
painter. 

The  ancestors  of  John  Frazee  (17901852),  the 
second  mark  in  the  premonitory  stirrings  of  sculp- 
ture in  this  country,  were  emigrants  from  Scotland 
who  landed  at  Perth  Amboy  amongst  the  early  set- 
tlers of  the  place.  The  family  name  was  Frazer 
which  was  changed  to  Frazee  by  the  grandfather 
of  John. 

John  Frazee  was  born  on  the  18th  of  July,  1790, 
in  the  upper  village  of  Rahway.  He  passed  a child- 
hood filled  with  more  than  the  usual  vicissitudes  of 
the  tenth  child  of  an  indigent  mother,  deserted  by 
a worthless  husband. 

Frazee’s  first  bust  was  carved  either  in  1824  or 
1825  and  was  probably  the  first  marble  bust  chiselled 
in  this  country,  undoubtedly  the  first  carved  by  a 
native  American.  The  subject  was  John  Wells,  a 
prominent  lawyer  of  New  York,  and  the  monument 
stands  in  old  St.  Paul’s  Church  on  Broadway.  It 


198  Pennsylvania  Hcafcenty  ot  jfine  Brts 


was  “ executed  from  imperfect  profiles  after  death  ” 
and  “ Frazee  modelled  it  and  put  it  into  marble 
without  teacher  or  instruction.” 

Under  the  circumstances  the  success  of  the  bust 
is  extraordinary.  For  the  Wells  Memorial  the 
sculptor  received  one  thousand  dollars.  What 
labours  intervened  are  not  recorded,  but,  in  1831, 
at  the  instance  of  the  Honourable  G.  C.  Verplanck, 
Congress  appropriated  five  hundred  dollars  for  a 
bust  of  John  Jay,  and  Frazee  executed  it  much 
to  the  satisfaction  of  his  employers  and  his  own 
fame. 

He  rapidly  became  known  as  a portrait  maker 
and  made  many  busts  of  distinguished  men  of  his 
day,  but  none  more  interesting  than  the  portrait  of 
himself  of  which  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the 
Fine  Arts  possesses  the  original  plaster  cast  — a 
relic  of  great  value- — and  a bronze  replica  made 
recently. 

The  head  represents  Frazee  in  his  thirty-ninth 
year,  according  to  his  own  statement,  though  he 
appears  much  younger.  The  shoulders  are  cut  away 
and  the  pose  is  vigorous  and  full  of  character.  The 
head  is  held  erect,  turned  to  the  right  with  an  ex- 
pression of  earnest  frankness.  The  short  side 
whiskers  show  the  too  professional  touch  of  the 
stone-cutter,  but  the  curly  hair,  with  all  its  conven- 
tionality, is  full  of  colour  and  very  artistic.  In  this 


Sculpture 


199 


bust  Frazee  presents  himself  as  a personality  — one 
that  it  would  be  a pleasure  to  know. 

With  these  unrelated  and  sporadic  outcroppings 
of  genius  the  history  of  American  Sculpture  comes 
down  to  1805  when  Horatio  Greenough  (1805- 
1852),  our  first  professional  sculptor,  was  born. 
He  and  his  group  took  themselves  with  ponderous 
gravity,  sped  away  to  Rome  and  Florence  for  life 
and  livelihood,  and  under  the  tutelage  of  Thorwald- 
sen,  the  famous  Danish  sculptor,  allied  themselves 
with  the  classic  revival  in  Italy. 

Greenough  was  born  in  Boston  and  died  in  Som- 
erville, Massachusetts.  He  received  his  early  in- 
spiration in  art  from  association  with  Washington 
Allston,  with  whom  much  of  his  time  during  his 
junior  and  senior  years  was  spent,  and  to  whose 
influence  is  probably  due  Greenough’s  early  depar- 
ture for  Rome,  where  the  unbounded  opportunities 
offered  to  a young  artist  enabled  him  to  carry  into 
effect  the  plans  of  study  he  had  formed  under  Mr. 
Allston’s  advice. 

With  our  present  freedom  of  thought  in  art  and 
letters  it  is  difficult  to  put  ourselves  in  sympathy 
with  the  work  of  Horatio  Greenough,  or,  indeed, 
with  the  best  of  the  modellers  of  the  epoch  of  Classic 
Revival.  In  their  perfunctory  idealization  one  may 
search  in  vain  for  the  personal  note.  Whatever  in- 
dividuality may  have  struggled  for  mastery  in  the 


200  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


early  beginnings  of  their  art  was  promptly 
crushed  by  the  ponderous  certainty  of  Canova 
and  Thorwaldsen,  who  set  the  standard  for  the 
world. 

Rather  a thousand  times  the  stiff,  unskilful  carv- 
ings of  Rush  and  Frazee,  whose  work  is  instinct 
with  character  and  personality,  than  the  frigid,  im- 
personal aloofness  of  Greenough  whose  art  gives  no 
hint  of  a national  expression,  reflects  no  picture  of 
his  time  or  condition.  His  ideal  statue  of  Wash- 
ington, the  best  known  of  his  works,  stands  before 
the  east  front  of  the  Capitol  at  Washington,  having 
been  found  too  heavy  for  its  proper  destination,  in- 
side, beneath  the  vaulted  arch  of  the  Capitol. 

The  Academy  possesses  one  of  his  most  admired 
works,  a marble  bust  of  Lafayette,  signed  on  the 
back  with  the  sculptor’s  monogram  — H.  G.  — 
Compare  it  with  Rush’s  nervous,  vigorous  char- 
acterization of  the  general  and  note  its  lack  of  just 
those  elements  which  make  a portrait  valuable.  Its 
smoothly  rounded,  plethoric  surfaces  bear  little  re- 
semblance to  one’s  idea  of  the  energetic  French- 
man, and  where  Rush  has  supplied  the  picturesque 
accessories  of  costume,  Greenough,  true  to  his 
faith,  pictures  him  like  the  Roman  Emperors  of  old 
in  the  folds  of  a toga. 

Yet  Fenimore  Cooper,  who  befriended  the  young 
sculptor  in  Rome  and  whose  contemporary  opinion 


Sculpture 


201 


must  have  its  weight,  writes  of  the  work : “ The 
bust  of  Greenough,  (Lafayette)  is  the  very  man, 
and  should  be  dear  to  us  in  proportion  as  it  is  faith- 
ful.” 

Hiram  Powers  (1805-1873)  has  his  place  here 
in  the  development  of  American  sculpture.  His 
fame  rests,  or  rested,  upon  his  “ Greek  Slave,” 
which  was  finished  in  1843,  and  attained  a popular- 
ity in  which  public  sympathy  in  the  contemporary 
struggle  of  Greece  for  independence  played  a prom- 
inent part.  This  pure,  white  figure  with  its  bowed 
head,  shrinking  beauty  and  its  conspicuous  chain 
became  the  symbol  of  the  oppressed  country  from 
which  it  took  its  name. 

At  the  great  International  Exposition  of  1851  in 
London  its  success  was  overwhelming.  On  the 
strength  of  it  Hiram  Powers  became  instantly 
famous.  The  statue  was  the  centre  of  interest  at 
the  first  World’s  Fair  in  New  York,  1853,  and  was 
fondly  believed  to  be  the  greatest  work  of  sculpture 
known  to  history. 

The  original  was  sold  to  Captain  Grant  for  $4000 
and  is  now  in  the  gallery  of  the  Duke  of  Cleveland. 
Several  replicas  were  made,  of  which  the  first  was 
brought  to  America  in  1847  and  is  now  in  the  Cor- 
coran Gallery,  Washington.  The  third  copy  belongs 
to  the  Earl  of  Dudley,  while  a fourth,  purchased  by 
'Prince  Demidoff  for  $4000,  was  sold  at  that  noble- 


202  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


man’s  death  for  $11,000  to  A.  T.  Stewart,  Esq.,  of 
New  York. 

There  are  very  few  American  Museums  not  sup- 
plied with  busts  by  Powers.  Most  frequent  is  that 
•head  of  which  he  produced  a number  under  the  vary- 
ing titles  of  “ Ginevra,”  “ Evangeline,”  “ Faith,” 
“ Psyche,”  etc.,  and  which,  in  the  Academy’s  collec- 
tion is  listed  “ Proserpine.” 

Shobal  Vail  Clevenger  (1812-1843),  whose  brief 
career  left  many  busts  of  prominent  Americans, 
is  represented  in  the  Academy  by  three  examples  in 
plaster.  Of  these  the  portrait  of  Joseph  Hopkinson, 
the  second  president  of  the  Academy,  has  been  cast 
in  bronze  and  dedicated  to  the  portrait  gallery 
wThere  it  upholds  the  dignity  of  the  distinguished 
original,  with  his  humourous,  tiny  eyes,  his  long 
sagacious  nose  and  abbreviated  chin.  The  bust  of 
Allston  by  the  same  hand  is  scarcely  less  interesting 
in  character  and  gives  a pleasing  and  intimate  view 
of  this  early  American  painter. 

Tuckerman  sums  it  up : “ There  was  an  exacti- 
tude in  his  busts  that  gave  assurance  of  skill  founded 
upon  solid  principles.  . . . Clevenger  began  in  art 
where  all  noble  characters  begin  in  action  — at 
truth.” 

He  died  at  the  untimely  age  of  thirty-one,  and 
while  his  actual  contribution  to  art  was  slight  he  had 
a greater  influence  because  of  his  delight  in  his 


Sculpture 


203 


work  and  his  devotion  to  it  than  many  an  artist  who 
lived  longer  and  produced  more. 

Of  native  born  contemporary  Philadelphia  sculp- 
tors, the  Academy  possesses  excellent  examples  of 
four  — Edmund  A.  Stewardson,  Charles  Grafly, 
Alexander  Stirling  Calder  and  Albert  Laessle. 

Edmund  A.  Stewardson  (1860-1892),  belonged 
to  a talented  Philadelphia  family  and  gave  rich 
promise  of  a brilliant  career  when  his  life  was  cut 
short  by  an  accident  at  the  early  age  of  thirty-two 
years.  He  was  drowned  while  boating  at  Newport, 
Rhode  Island,  on  July  3,  1892. 

The  “ Bather,”  of  which  the  Academy  owns  the 
bronze  and  the  Metropolitan,  the  marble  copy,  ranks 
amongst  the  finest  products  of  American  art  and, 
so  far  as  it  goes,  expresses  an  accurate  knowledge, 
technical  skill  and  excellent  taste,  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  being  an  early  work,  there  is  still  present  the 
academic  influence  which  might  or  might  not  have 
been  cast  aside,  had  he  lived. 

The  small  bust  of  Alexander  Harrison,  in  bronze, 
owned  by  the  Academy  is  more  freely  done  and  is 
a charming  bit  of  pure  sculpture  as  well  as  an  excel- 
lent portrait  of  a fellow  artist.  His  “ Portrait  of  a 
Lady  ” completes  the  representation  in  the  Academy 
and  is  an  attractive  type  of  thirty  years  ago  appre- 
ciatively rendered. 

Of  the  work  of  Charles  Grafly  (1862-  ),  a 


204  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  fine  Brts 


Philadelphian  of  Pennsylvania  Dutch  extraction, 
the  Academy  possesses  but  one  example  despite  the 
fact  that  Grafly  has  lived  his  life  in  Philadelphia 
and,  one  might  say,  in  the  Academy,  where  he  was 
a student  from  1884  to  1888  and  has  been  an  in- 
structor since  1893. 

His  history  is  interesting  in  its  absolute  identi- 
fication with  his  environment.  Grafly  was  born  in 
Philadelphia  in  1862.  He  attended  school  until 
he  was  seventeen  years  of  age,  when  he  entered  a 
stone-carv  ing  establishment  in  order  to  gain  practi- 
cal knowledge  of  the  sculptor's  craft.  During  this 
time  he  attended  the  schools  of  the  Spring  Garden 
Institute  and  in  1884  he  was  admitted  to  the  x\cad- 
emy,  where  he  studied  modelling  and  painting  under 
Thomas  Eakins.  In  1888  he  went  to  Paris,  study- 
ing at  the  Academie  Julien  and  later  at  the  Ecole 
des  Beaux  Arts  — under  Chapu,  Dampt,  Bougue- 
reau  and  Tony  Robert  Fleury. 

At  the  Salon  of  1890  he  made  his  debut  with  two 
heads  in  plaster,  “ Daedalus  ” and  “ St.  John.” 
These  were  shown  the  following  year  in  Phila- 
delphia in  the  sixty-first  annual  exhibition  of  the 
Pennsylvania  Academy  and  the  “ Daedalus  ” vras 
awarded  honourable  mention  from  the  Temple  Trust 
Fund  and  purchased  for  the  permanent  collection 
for  which  it  was  cast  in  bronze. 

Grafly  received  honourable  mention  in  the  Salon 


Sculpture 


205 


of  1891  for  a life-size  nude  female  figure,  “ Mauvais 
Presage/’  now  in  the  possession  of  the  Detroit 
Museum  of  Art.  In  1893  he  received  a medal  at 
the  Columbian  Exposition,  Chicago,  and  in  1900  a 
gold  medal  from  the  Paris  Exposition  for  a collec- 
tion of  works  which  included  several  small  groups 
in  bronze. 

His  later  work  has  developed  his  greatest  origi- 
nality and  power  in  the  making  of  numerous  por- 
trait busts,  in  which  he  stands  unrivalled.  A most 
interesting  series  of  contemporary  painters  was  com- 
menced in  1899  with  a portrait  bust  of  Hugh 
Henry  Breckenridge,  a Philadelphia  painter  with 
advanced  ideas  upon  colour  who  has  produced 
much  important  work  in  landscape  and  por- 
traits. 

The  Annual  Exhibition  of  1898  contained  an  oil 
portrait  of  Charles  Grafly  by  Breckenridge  and 
that  of  1899  the  portrait  bust  in  plaster  of  Hugh 
H.  Breckenridge  by  Grafly  — the  two  having  been 
made  for  exchange  each  artist  retaining  his  own 
portrait.  This  was  the  year  that  the  Academy 
bestowed  upon  Grafly  its  gold  medal  of  honour 
“ for  distinguished  services  in  art  and  to  the  Acad- 
emy.” 

The  series  of  portrait  busts  of  artists  to-day  in- 
cludes, beside  the  portrait  of  Breckenridge,  heads 
of  Joseph  Decamp,  W.  Elmer  Schofield,  Edwin  S. 


206  Pennsylvania  Scabemy  of  jflne  Brts 

Clymer,  William  M.  Paxton  and  Edward  W.  Red- 
field,  and  is  destined  to  become  one  day  the  nucleus 
of  a portrait  gallery  as  distinguished  as  the  great 
Stuart  collection  in  the  Academy.  To  such  a gal- 
lery might  be  added  his  busts  of  Dr.  Isaac  Starr, 
the  famous  specialist  on  diseases  of  children;  Dr. 
Joseph  L.  Price,  the  late  surgeon;  Henry  Lorenz 
Viereck,  the  government  entomologist  at  the  Na- 
tional Museum  in  Washington ; Edward  H.  Coates, 
a former  president  of  the  Academy,  and  other 
notables. 

Grafly’s  work  is  admirable  in  all  the  fundamental 
qualities  of  drawing  and  construction,  to  which  he 
has  added  a superb  finish  in  the  broad  planes  of  the 
handling.  These  busts  are  charming  in  their 
fluency,  in  a sense  of  plasticity  throughout,  as 
though  the  clay  had  never  grown  dry  and  unre- 
sponsive. They  skip  all  the  century  of  elemental 
strugglers,  whose  work  interests  us  more  from  the 
historic  than  the  artistic  standpoint,  and  relate  back 
to  Houdon  and  his  like  — for  in  both  we  see  those 
qualities  of  permanency,  of  universal  speech  which 
make  for  endurance  in  all  the  great  art  of  all  times 
and  all  countries. 

Of  the  work  of  Alexander  Stirling  Calder 
( 1870-  ) the  Academy  possesses  an  excellent 

example  of  his  best  period  in  the  life-size  bronze 
of  an  infant,  which  he  calls  “ Man  Cub.”  The 


BUST  OF  WILLIAM  RUSH  (see  page  195).  BUST  OF  EDWARD  HORNER  COATES. 

By  William  Rush.  . By  Charles  Grafly. 


Sculpture 


209 


displays  a sense  of  the  quaintly  humourous,  what 
one  might  call  the  human  side  of  the  reptile  world 
which  places  him  at  once  as  a serious  nature  student. 
The  blue  eyed  lizard  is  scratching  his  head  with 
one  of  his  clover  back  feet,  deriving  from  the 
process  an  exquisite  sensation  of  mingled  pleasure 
and  pain,  which  is  expressed  in  the  exact  angle  at 
which  his  head  is  turned  to  meet  the  responsive 
claw,  while  his  eyes  lose  none  of  their  alertness  to 
the  ever  present  possibility  of  danger.  The  graceful 
tail  curves  across  a bit  of  ground  covered  with  the 
winged  seed  of  the  maple  tree. 

The  Academy  is  fortunate  in  the  possession  of 
a beautiful  example  of  Auguste  Rodin  (1840-  ) 

in  the  “ Recumbent  Figure,”  presented  by  Alex- 
ander Harrison  in  1902.  It  exemplifies  one  of 
the  most  notable  phases  of  the  great  French  mas- 
ter’s work,  his  skill  and  tenderness  in  the  modelling 
of  the  nude  back  of  a female  figure.  There  is  a 
subtlety,  a plasticity  in  the  lines  of  this  figure  — 
only  partly  wrought  from  the  marble  — that  defy 
imitation. 

Rodin,  who  may  be  considered  the  dominant 
influence  for  sculpture  in  his  century,  is  best  repre- 
sented in  Paris  — in  his  “ Penseur,”  placed  before 
the  entrance  of  the  Pantheon,  the  French  temple  of 
fame. 

“ The  Battle  of  the  Centaurs  and  Lapithia,”  by 


210  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


John  Graham  Lough  (1806-1876),  referred  to  as 
having  been  saved  from  the  great  fire  of  1845, 
which  destroyed  so  many  of  the  Academy’s  treas- 
ures, is  in  plaster  from  the  original  model,  and  was 
presented  by  the  artist  in  1836. 

The  subject  is  the  familiar  one  of  the  great  com- 
bat described  by  Hesiod,  but  more  at  length  by 
Ovid,  in  the  twelfth  book  of  his  Metamorphoses. 
Brief  accounts  may  also  be  found  in  modern  works 
of  Mythology.  It  was  a favourite  subject  with 
ancient  sculptors,  and  even  Phidias  employed  his 
chisel  upon  it.  It  is  briefly  this : 

At  the  marriage  of  Pirithous,  who  was  one  of 
the  Lapithae,  with  Hippodamia,  the  chiefs  of  the 
Lapithae  were  assembled  to  celebrate  the  nuptials. 
The  Centaurs  were  also  invited  to  the  festivity  — 
one  of  them,  Eurytus,  inflamed  by  wine,  resolved 
to  make  the  bride  his  prize,  and  in  his  fury,  seized 
her  by  the  hair  to  carry  her  off  — his  companions 
followed  his  example,  and  each,  according  to  his 
fancy,  fastened  upon  one  of  the  female  attendants 
of  the  bride.  The  Lapithae  instantly  resented  this 
brutal  outrage,  and  the  fight  became  general.  Many 
of  the  Centaurs  were  slain,  and  the  rest  compelled 
to  retreat. 

The  group  exhibited  at  the  Academy  is  the  work 
of  Mr.  Lough,  a British  artist,  born  in  Greenhead, 
Northumberland,  in  the  last  century,  and  one  of 


THE  BATTLE  OF  THE  CENTAURS  AND  LAPITHIA. 
By  John  Graham  Lough. 


Sculpture 


211 


the  numerous  sculptors  of  his  time  to  be  influ- 
enced by  the  classic  revival  in  Italy.  Lough  first 
exhibited  in  the  Royal  Academy  in  1826.  He  went 
to  Italy  in  1834  and  remained  four  years.  He 
modelled  a statue  of  Queen  Victoria  in  1845  and 
of  the  Prince  Consort  in  1847  and  made  a statue 
of  the  Marquis  of  Hastings  for  Malta  in  1848. 

The  group,  at  the  time  of  its  presentation,  was 
extravagantly  admired  on  account  of  its  vigorous 
action  and  handsome  composition,  and  receives  sev- 
eral pages  of  description  in  a contemporary  cata- 
logue. Near  the  top  of  the  pyramid  of  men,  women 
and  horses,  the  bride  is  seen,  her  dishevelled  hair  in 
the  grip  of  her  ravisher.  Theseus  attacks  the  Cen- 
taur to  rescue  her,  and  Pirithous,  on  a magnificent 
horse  with  a drawn  sword,  is  flying  to  her  assist- 
ance, aided  by  Hercules.  There  is  a woman  sup- 
ported in  the  act  of  falling  to  the  ground  by  one  of 
the  Lapithse,  who  at  the  same  time,  with  his  other 
hand,  defends  himself  from  the  assault  of  a Cen- 
taur.. 

One  of  the  Centaurs  appears  dressed  in  a lion’s 
skin,  and  in  the  legend  is  thus  described  by  Ovid : 

“ E’en  still  methinks  I see  Phceocomes  ; 

Strange  was  his  habit,  and  as  odd  his  dress, 

Six  lions’  hides,  with  thongs  together  fast, 

His  upper  part  defended  to  the  waist, 

And  when  man  ended,  the  continued  vest, 

Spread  on  his  back  the  trappings  of  a beast.” 


CHAPTER  XIII 


THE  PHILLIPS  COLLECTION 

One  of  the  most  valuable  of  the  Academy’s  pos- 
sessions is  the  Print  Collection,  which  came  to  the 
institution  in  its  entirety  as  the  bequest  of  John  S. 
Phillips  on  April  io,  1876,  and  ranks  as  the  finest 
collection  of  etchings  and  engravings  in  the  United 
States. 

In  his  important  work  on  Etching,  that  eminent 
authority,  Mr.  Sylvestre  R.  Koehler,  thus  refers  to 
the  Phillips  Collection : 

“ First  in  magnitude  among  the  collections  of  the 
United  States  stands  the  Phillips  Collection,  the 
property  of  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine 
Arts  in  Philadelphia,  to  which  it  came  by  bequest 
of  the  late  John  S.  Phillips,  who  died  in  1876,  and 
is  said  to  have  been  engaged  for  thirty  years  in 
bringing  it  together.  The  collection  contains  be- 
tween fifty  and  sixty  thousand  prints  arranged  in 
volumes,  chronologically  and  according  to  schools. 
Its  richness  in  the  works  of  etchers  of  all  times  and 
schools  and  its  historical  completeness  in  this  respect 
I have  had  occasion  over  and  over  again  to  testify 

212 


XTbe  Phillips  Collection 


213 


to  in  these  pages.  As  part  of  the  collection  Mr. 
Phillips  left  to  the  Academy  also  a small  library 
which  contains  most  of  the  books  needed  by  the 
student.  The  collection  is  in  charge  of  Mr.  H.  C. 
Whipple,1  the  life-long  friend  and  assistant  of  Mr. 
Phillips,  and  is  easily  accessible  to  the  public,  being 
open  to  inspection,  in  the  presence  of  the  curator, 
or  some  one  deputed  by  him,  every  day  of  the  week. 

“ There  is  one  great  drawback  to  it  however, 
which  it  is  absolutely  necessary  to  mention.  Mr. 
Phillips  cared  more  for  its  historical  completeness 
than  for  quality,  and  hence  a large  proportion  of  the 
impressions  fails  to  give  anything  like  an  adequate 
idea  of  the  true  character  of  the  plates  from  which 
they  were  printed,  in  their  early  and  true  condition. 

1 This  charming  old  gentleman  was  intimately  associated  with  the 
life  of  the  Academy  for  twenty-seven  years  and  was  much  beloved 
by  all  who  came  in  contact  with  him.  He  died  on  May  20,  1903, 
and  his  funeral,  conducted  by  the  Fellowship  of  The  Pennsylvania 
Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts,  was  held  at  St.  Stephen’s  Church,  on 
May  23,  1903.  On  this  occasion  the  church  was  packed  to  its  ut- 
most capacity  with  friends  of  Mr.  Whipple,  who  were  anxious  to 
bear  this  last  tribute  to  his  memory.  The  character  of  the  attend- 
ance was  extraordinary  in  that  it  showed  how  wide  had  been  the 
field  of  the  old  gentleman’s  influence.  Ladies  and  gentlemen  from 
Philadelphia’s  most  exclusive  society  stood  side  by  side  with  models 
who  had  posed  in  the  schools  of  the  Academy.  All  the  officials  of 
the  Academy  were  present  from  the  president  and  managing 
director  down  to  an  old  coloured  man,  Tom  Drayton,  who  for  years 
had  done  the  carting  of  pictures  for  the  exhibitions.  The  scene 
was  a most  touching  and  impressive  one  and  will  live  long  in  the 
memories  of  those  who  witnessed  it. 


214  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  fftne  Brts 


Hence  the  collection  is  a dangerous  one  for  the  be- 
ginner who  cannot  tell  what  may  be  a good  and 
what  may  be  a bad  impression,  and  who  cannot 
supply  in  his  mind  the  deficiencies  observable  in 
many  of  the  specimens.  Such  a student  may  easily 
be  prejudiced  against  a given  etcher  by  charging 
him  with  the  shortcomings  of  the  worn  or  otherwise 
impaired  prints  before  him,  for  which  he  cannot  be 
held  responsible. 

“ The  more  advanced  student  who  is  informed  as 
to  the  difference  which  the  condition  of  a print 
produces  is,  of  course,  much  less  exposed  to  such  a 
danger  and  to  him  the  Phillips  Collection  with  its 
library  offers  very  desirable  facilities  and  is  cer- 
tainly the  best  at  present  to  be  found  in  this  country. 

“ Mr.  Phillips  left  a small  fund  ($12,000)  for 
the  maintenance  and  increase  of  the  collection,  but 
as  it  is  insufficient  for  these  purposes  no  additions 
have  been  made  to  it  since  his  death,  and  nothing 
has  been  done  to  improve  its  condition.  By  re- 
mounting and  arranging  in  portfolios  instead  of  in 
volumes,  an  arrangement  which  often  makes  com- 
parison impossible,  the  appearance,  as  well  as  the 
usefulness,  of  the  collection  might  be  considerably 
helped.  There  is  a manuscript  catalogue  giving  the 
names  of  the  etchers,  engravers,  etc.,  represented. 
A card  catalogue  of  the  library  is  now  in  prepara- 
tion.” Etching  — An  outline  of  its  technical  proc- 


TTbe  ipbtlltps  Collection 


215 


esses  and  its  history  with  some  remarks  on  collec- 
tions and  collecting.  By  S.  R.  Koehler.  Published 
by  Cassell  and  Co.,  Ltd.,  New  York.  London. 
Paris.  Melbourne.  1885. 

The  collection’s  chief  richness  is  in  the  depart- 
ment of  etching,  the  progress  of  which  art  it  illus- 
trates through  a period  of  nearly  four  centuries, 
beginning  with  examples  of  the  Hopfers,  a family 
of  etchers  who  flourished  in  Augsburg  in  the  first 
third  of  the  fifteenth  century  and  are  the  first  to 
follow  this  profession,  of  whom  we  have  any  re- 
liable account.  Two  of  the  greatest  line  engravers 
of  England,  Sharp  and  Woollett,  are  well  repre- 
sented and  there  is  an  extremely  valuable  group  of 
wood  cuts  of  the  sixteenth  century,  known  as  “ Clair 
Obscurs,”  containing  the  remarkable  efforts  of  early 
wood  cutters  to  imitate  oil  paintings  and  whose 
modernity  is  as  extraordinary  as  it  is  unexpected. 

Mr.  Koehler,  who  was  a profound  student  of  the 
art  of  engraving  from  the  technical  side,  spent  many 
days  with  the  Phillips  Collection  going  over  the 
prints,  upon  which  he  has  left  as  a valuable  memento 
of  his  visit,  numerous  notes  both  explanatory  and 
critical  and  of  the  greatest  possible  value  and  in- 
terest to  students  considering  the  weight  of  his 
professional  opinion  in  such  matters.  These  memo- 
randa are  made  generally  in  English  but  often  in 
German  upon  the  margin  of  the  print  itself  or  upon 


216  Pennsylvania  Hcatemy  of  fine  Hrts 


loose  sheets  of  fool’s  cap  inserted  in  the  volume  to 
which  they  refer.  They  are  written  in  pencil  and 
read  like  intimate  conversations  with  the  author. 
His  handwriting  was  round  and  clerical 

The  manuscript  catalogue,  to  which  Koehler  re- 
fers, is  all  that  exists  for  reference  to  the  prints  ex- 
cept a card  catalogue  of  the  portraits  written  in  Mr. 
Whipple’s  firm  hand  and  completed  shortly  before 
his  death.  The  manuscript  catalogue  handsomely 
bound  in  book  form,  was  made  by  Mr.  Phillips  him- 
self. It  is  indexed  under  the  head  of  engravers 
simply,  without  reference  to  painter  or  subject, 
which  carries  out  the  peculiarity  of  Mr.  Phillips’ 
interest  in  the  art  of  engraving  pure  and  simple. 
For  this  reason,  the  catalogue  has  only  a very  lim- 
ited sphere  of  usefulness  — though  it  has  been  most 
carefully  and  exactly  prepared. 

Mr.  Koehler  compares  the  collection  with  the 
Gray  collection  belonging  to  Harvard  University, 
bequeathed  by  the  late  Honourable  Francis  Calley 
Gray,  LL  D..  who  died  in  1856,  and  which  con- 
tains between  five  and  six  thousand  specimens:  the 
Tosti  Collection,  so  called  from  its  former  owner, 
the  late  Cardinal  Antonio  Tosti  of  Rome,  which 
was  given  to  the  Public  Library  of  Boston  by  the 
late  Thomas  G.  Appleton  in  1869.  and  contains 
nearly  sixty-five  hundred  prints ; the  collection 
made  by  the  late  Honourable  George  P.  Marsh  at 


Cbe  pbilUps  Collection 


217 


Washington  and  acquired  by  the  Smithsonian  In- 
stitute, and  one  in  the  Redwood  Library  and 
Athenaeum  at  Newport,  Rhode  Island,  left  by  the 
late  Charles  B.  King,  artist. 

The  famous  Claghorne  Collection,  comprising 
about  twenty  thousand  prints  collected  by  James  S. 
Claghorne,  president  of  the  Academy,  1872-1884, 
was  sold  after  Mr.  Claghorne’s  death  and  is  now 
owned  by  Mr.  T.  Harrison  Garrett,  of  Baltimore. 
This  collection  stands  preeminent  in  the  works  of 
modern  etchers  of  the  French,  English,  Dutch,  Bel- 
gian, German,  Italian  and  Spanish  schools.  To  the 
exhibition  of  the  Philadelphia  Society  of  Etchers 
held  in  1883  its  then  owner  contributed  no  less  than 
six  hundred  specimens  by  two  hundred  and  forty- 
two  modern  etchers. 


CHAPTER  XIV 


THE  PENNSYLVANIA  MUSEUM  : A GENERAL  SURVEY 

The  Pennsylvania  Museum  and  School  of  In- 
dustrial Art  was  chartered  on  February  27,  1876, 
and  may  be  said  to  be  the  direct  outgrowdh  of  the 
Centennial  Exposition  of  that  year.  Certainly  the 
coincidence  was  fortuitous,  for  the  nucleus  of  the 
present  extensive  collections  of  the  Museum  con- 
sist of  some  of  the  most  valuable  exhibits  from  the 
International  Exhibition  of  1876,  many  of  them 
having  been  presented  by  the  exhibitors,  while 
others  were  purchased  with  funds  raised  for  the 
purpose. 

The  Pennsylvania  Museum  is  the  guest  of  the 
directors  of  Memorial  Hall,  which  is  situated  in  a 
historic  part  of  the  Fairmount  Park,  not  far  from 
the  site  of  the  one  time  residence  of  William  Bing- 
ham, that  attractive  mansion,  known  as  “ Lans- 
downe,”  built  before  the  Revolution  by  John  Penn, 
a grandson  of  the  founder  of  the  commonwealth, 
and  occupied  by  various  distinguished  personages 
until  its  destruction  by  fire,  a number  of  years  before 
the  present  park  system  was  created.  Not  far  from 

218 


THE  PENNSYLVANIA  MUSEUM,  MEMORIAL  HALL,  FAIRMOUNT  PARK 


Ubc  Pennsylvania  ZlDuseum 


219 


n'.I.TrloI 

..rjL 


M I 

71 

, * V 

• 

i 

j F 

l . 

i x | 

H fl 

GROUND  PLAN  OF  MEMORIAL  HALL 


A.  South  Vestibule.  Oriental 

Section. 

B.  Rotunda.  Models,  etc. 

C.  West  Gallery.  Wilstach  Col- 

lection of  Paintings. 

D.  East  Gallery.  Ceramics, 

Glass,  Enamels,  Carvings, 
Lacquers,  Silver. 

E.  West  Corridor.  Wilstach 

Collection  of  Paintings. 

F.  East  Corridor.  Bloomfield- 

Moore  Collections. 

G.  Southwest  Pavilion.  Greek, 

Roman  and  Egyptian  Anr 
tiquities. 

H.  Southeast  Pavilion.  Hector 

Tyndale  Memorial  Collec- 
tion. Dr.  Francis  W.  Lewis 
Collection.  Oriental  Pot- 
tery and  Porcelain. 

I.  Northeast  Pavilion.  Bloom- 

field-Moore  Collection  of 
Ceramics. 

J.  Northwest  Pavilion.  Wil- 

stach Collection  of  Paint- 
ings. 


K.  Seals,  Books,  etc. 

L.  North  Vestibule.  Exhibition 

of  Work  of  Students  of  the 
School  of  Industrial  Art 
Connected  with  the  Mu- 
seum. 

M.  Musical  Instruments. 

N.  Library. 

O.  P,  Q.  Offices. 

R.  Women’s  Toilet  Room. 

S.  Men’s  Toilet  Room. 

T.  U,  V,  W.  Miscellaneous. 

X.  Furniture. 

Y.  North  Corridor.  Arms  and 

Armour,  Metal  Work,  and 
Lamborn  Collection  of 
Mexican  Paintings. 

Z.  Textiles  and  Costumes. 

BASEMENT 

South  Side.  Pompeian  Views 
and  Baird  Centennial 
Model. 

North  Side.  The  Mrs.  W.  D. 
Frishmuth  Antiquarian  Col- 
lection. 


220  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  ffine  Brts 


Lansdowne  were  the  country  homes  of  several 
Philadelphians  of  consequence  — notably  Judge 
Richard  Peters,  of  Belmont,  Samuel  Breck,  of 
Sweetbriar,  etc. 

The  building  is  in  the  style  of  the  modern  Re- 
naissance and  is  the  work  of  H.  J.  Schwartzman, 
architect.  It  was  begun  July  4,  1874  and  finished 
in  March,  1876,  and  during  the  Centennial  Exposi- 
tion was  used  as  an  art  gallery.  In  front  of  the 
south  entrance  are  two  colossal  bronze  statues  of 
winged  horses  attended  by  Calliope  and  Erato,  the 
muses  of  epic  and  erotic  poetry,  which  were  origi- 
nally designed  for  the  Opera  House  of  Vienna. 
They  were  purchased  in  Vienna  in  the  Centennial 
year  by  a public-spirited  citizen  and  presented  to 
Fairmount  Park. 

The  model  which  the  organizers  of  the  Museum 
wished  to  follow  in  the  conduct  of  the  institution 
was  the  South  Kensington  Museum  in  London 
and  its  purpose,  as  set  forth  in  the  charter,  was  to 
establish  for  the  State  of  Pennsylvania,  in  the  City 
of  Philadelphia,  a museum  of  art  in  all  its  branches 
and  technical  application,  with  a special  view  to 
the  development  of  the  art  industries  of  the  State, 
and  to  provide  instruction  in  drawing,  painting, 
modelling,  designing,  etc.,  through  practical  schools, 
libraries  and  otherwise. 

The  School  of  Industrial  Art  connected  with  the 


Ube  Pennsylvania  /ffimseum 


221 


Museum  was  opened  in  May,  1877,  and  is  at  present 
situated  at  the  corner  of  Broad  and  Pine  Streets. 
It  has  become  the  most  important  of  its  kind  in  the 
country. 

The  Board  of  Trustees  consists  of  the  Governor 
of  the  State  and  the  Mayor  of  the  City,  ex  ofhciis, 
and  twenty  citizens  of  Philadelphia,  including  repre- 
sentatives of  the  State  Senate  and  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, the  Select  and  Common  Councils  of  the 
City,  and  the  Commissioners  of  Fairmount  Park. 
An  associate  committee  of  women,  the  outgrowth 
of  the  Women’s  Executive  Committee  of  the  Cen- 
tennial Exposition,  came  into  existence  in  1883,  and 
serves  as  an  auxiliary  to  the  Board  of  Trustees. 

In  the  same  year  a fund  of  $50,000  was  placed  in 
trust  for  the  benefit  of  the  institution  by  the  late 
Joseph  E.  Temple,  three-fifths  of  the  interest  of 
which  is  set  apart  for  the  purchase  of  objects  of 
art  for  the  Museum  and  the  remainder  for  the  uses 
of  the  school.  Many  of  the  most  valuable  of  the 
exhibits  in  the  Museum  bear  the  label  of  the  Temple 
Trust. 

The  Pennsylvania  Museum  occupies  an  unique 
position  amongst  American  institutions  dedicated 
to  the  uses  of  art.  Originally  conceived  to  embrace 
in  its  collections  not  only  the  fine  arts  but  the  in- 
dustrial arts  as  well,  it  covers  the  field  in  its  broad- 
est sense  and  includes  in  its  exhibits,  not  only  ex- 


222  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


amples  of  the  artistic  output  of  all  times  and  all 
countries,  but  also  is  strong  in  educational  exhibits 
illustrating  the  history,  development  and  manufac- 
turing processes  of  the  various  departments  of  in- 
dustrial achievement. 

Ceramics  form  one  of  the  most  important  fea- 
tures of  the  Museum.  These  collections  have 
grown  to  such  proportions  that  they  now  rank  with 
the  best  and  most  representative  to  be  found  on  this 
side  of  the  Atlantic.  They  include  numerous  groups 
of  porcelains  from  China  and  Japan;  English  and 
Continental  china;  both  antique  and  modern  and 
classical  pottery  of  Rome  and  Greece.  There  is  an 
interesting  section  devoted  to  the  pottery  of  the 
Aboriginal  Americans  — Mexican,  Peruvian, 
Mound  Builders  and  Pueblo  — and  the  only  his- 
torically complete  series  of  pottery  and  porcelain 
of  the  United  States  in  existence.  The  latter  in- 
cludes a large  group  of  hard  porcelain,  made  by 
Tucker  and  Hemphill  in  Philadelphia  from  1825 
to  1838,  and  an  unrivalled  collection  of  Pennsyl- 
vania German  slip  — decorated  and  sgraffito  pot- 
tery, produced  at  local  potteries  in  Montgomery 
and  Bucks  Counties,  Pennsylvania,  between  1730 
and  1850. 

Among  the  rarest  pottery  in  the  Museum  are 
some  fine  examples  of  Mexican  Majolica  of  the 
seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries.  A group  of 


XTbe  Pennsylvania  jflbuseum 


223 


genuine  Lowestoft  china  recently  procured  from 
England  is  interesting  owing  to  its  extreme  rarity 
in  the  light  of  recent  discoveries.  The  Museum 
possesses  a little  group  of  five  examples  of  fully 
authenticated  hard  paste  Capo  di  Monte,  which  are 
among  the  only  genuine  pieces  to  be  found  in  the 
museums  of  this  country. 

The  Museum’s  collection  of  American  glass  flasks 
and  bottles  with  relief  designs  of  historical  sub- 
jects is  probably  unique,  while  the  entire  depart- 
ment of  American  glass  illustrates  the  various  proc- 
esses of  glass  making  in  this  country,  and  includes 
representative  examples  of  blown,  cut,  pressed, 
enamelled,  silvered,  stained,  cameo  and  intaglio- 
carved  glass. 

A collection  of  forty-four  pieces  of  domestic 
stained  glass,  mostly  Swiss  in  origin,  is  unique  in 
this  country.  The  Pennsylvania  Museum  is  in- 
debted to  the  generosity  of  Miss  Mary  Lewis  for 
this  valuable  accession.  The  collection  was  picked 
up  piece  by  piece  by  the  late  Dr.  Francis  W.  Lewis 
some  thirty  years  or  more  ago,  some  of  the  finest 
specimens  being  from  the  well-known  collection  of 
Dr.  Ferdinand  Keller,  of  Zurich. 

The  patrons  of  the  Museum  have  been  many. 
In  1882,  Mrs.  Bloomfield-Moore  presented  the  first 
instalment  of  a valuable  collection  of  art  objects 
which  she  had  collected  during  her  trips  abroad. 


224  Pennsylvania  BcaDemy  of  fine  Brts 


This  collection  was  placed  in  the  Museum  as  a 
memorial  to  her  husband,  the  late  Bloomfield  H. 
Moore,  a prominent  citizen  of  Philadelphia.  At  a 
later  date  the  collection  was  largely  increased  by 
the  donor.  It  covers  the  broadest  field  of  indus- 
trial art,  including  examples  of  antique  furniture, 
enamels,  carved  ivories,  jewelry,  plate,  metal  work, 
glass,  pottery,  porcelain,  books,  fans,  textiles,  cos- 
tumes and  paintings.  One  entire  room  is  devoted 
to  the  Bloomfield-Moore  Collection  of  Ceramics, 
rich  in  Chinese  porcelains. 

The  Museum  is  especially  valuable  because  of 
the  excellence  of  its  arrangement  and  the  accessi- 
bility of  its  exhibits,  affording  to  the  student  or  the 
visitor  every  facility  in  whatever  department  he 
may  elect  to  work.  Exhibits  follow  a logical  se- 
quence and  are  featured  according  to  their  impor- 
tance and  rarity.  The  Director,  Dr.  Edwin  AtLee 
Barber,  has  established  an  unique  feature  in  mu- 
seum work,  a bureau  of  identification,  and  may  be 
consulted  upon  knotty  points  within  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  Museum.  This  has  proved  a great  suc- 
cess and  is  much  appreciated  by  the  people. 

The  system  of  numbering  has  much  to  recom- 
mend it.  Each  object  in  the  Museum  is  marked 
by  a distinguishing  number  or  letter,  corresponding 
to  its  label  and  the  entry  in  the  records  of  the  in- 
stitution. Articles  which  have  been  purchased  or 


Ube  Pennsylvania  /Ifouseum 


225 


presented  bear  the  date  of  accession,  followed  by  a 
number  which  indicates  the  order  in  which  the  ob- 
ject has  been  received  in  that  year:  thus,  ’76-154 
indicates  that  the  exhibit  was  the  one  hundred  and 
fifty-fourth  received  in  the  year  1876. 

Articles  on  loan  bear  a letter  corresponding  to 
the  year  followed  by  a number. 


CHAPTER  XV 


AMERICAN  POTTERY  AND  PORCELAIN 

The  Museum’s  collection  of  American  Pottery 
is  the  outgrowth  of  the  extensive  collection  of 
ceramics  formed  by  the  Director,  Dr.  Edwin  AtLee 
Barber,  for  the  purpose  of  illustrating  his  “ History 
of  the  Pottery  and  Porcelain  of  the  United  States,” 
which  was  purchased  in  its  entirety  by  Mr.  John  T. 
Morris,  of  Philadelphia,  and  presented  by  him  to  the 
Museum. 

Around  this  nucleus  have  been  gathered  many  of 
the  more  recent  productions  of  American  manu- 
factures, and  the  collection  bids  fair  to  become  the 
most  complete  of  its  kind  in  existence. 

The  Barber  collection  contains  many  rare  and 
curious  pieces  which  serve  to  illustrate  the  earlier 
history  of  the  fictile  art  in  this  country.  Of  special 
interest  are  the  full  series  of  Pennsylvania  slip- 
decorated wares  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  the 
hard  paste  porcelains  of  Messrs.  Tucker  and  Hemp- 
hill, produced  in  Philadelphia  previous  to  the  year 
1838.  Other  early  establishments  are  represented, 

226 


Hmerlcan  pottery  ant>  porcelain  227 


bringing  the  history  of  the  potter’s  art  in  the  United 
States  down  to  the  present  time. 

The  collection  is  divided  into  two  series,  the  artis- 
tic and  the  technical.  The  first  includes  such  ob- 
jects as  have  an  artistic  or  historical  value  and  the 
latter  comprises  the  primitive  appliances,  tools, 
moulds,  engraved  plates  for  transfer  printing  and 
specimens  of  wares  in  the  different  stages  of  com- 
pletion. 

The  existence  of  the  ancient  art  of  “ slip  ” deco- 
ration in  America  was  not  suspected  until  1891, 
when,  through  the  accidental  purchase  of  a red 
earthenware  pie  plate,  Dr.  Barber  was  led  to  make 
a series  of  investigations  which  resulted  in  the  in- 
teresting discovery  that  this  curious  art,  brought 
from  Germany,  had  flourished  in  Eastern  Pennsyl- 
vania before  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century. 

The  original  find,  which  was  embellished  with 
floral  and  bird  designs  and  an  inscription  in  Ger- 
man, with  the  date  1826,  was  supposed,  when  ac- 
quired, to  be  of  European  manufacture  but  careful 
examination  revealed  the  fact  that  some  of  the 
words  lettered  about  the  border  were  in  Pennsyl- 
vania German. 

Slip-decorated  ware  is  therefore  the  oldest  pot- 
tery, of  an  ornamental  character,  made  by  the  white 
settlers  in  Pennsylvania  of  which  we  have  any 
knowledge.  The  decoration  was  drawn  upon  the 


228  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  of  fine  arts 


surface  of  common  earthenware  by  means  of  dif- 
ferent coloured  liquid  clays,  or  “ slips  ” poured 
through  a quill  attached  to  a cup  and  afterward  the 
whole  was  covered  with  a transparent  glaze.  In 
the  German  communities  of  Bucks  and  Montgom- 
ery counties  such  ware  was  made  for  fully  a century 
and  a half,  but  the  old  potteries  have  entirely  passed 
out  of  sight  and  only  remain  in  the  memories  of  the 
descendants  of  the  early  potters.  A number  of 
pieces  have  come  to  light  which  bear  English  in- 
scriptions, from  which  it  has  been  argued  that  the 
manufacture  of  slip  ware  was  not  confined  exclu- 
sively to  the  German  settlements. 

In  the  handbook  prepared  by  the  collector  of  this 
collection.  Dr.  Barber  says : “ In  addition  to  slip 
tracing,  the  reverse  method  of  slip  engraving  was 
also  practised  at  these  local  potteries,  which  process 
consisted  in  covering  the  red  biscuit  or  unglazed 
ware  with  a thin  layer  of  white  slip,  and  scratching 
or  cutting  the  designs  through  the  dried  coating  to 
show  the  darker  colour  beneath.  The  application 
of  a clear  glaze  after  the  designs  were  touched  with 
yellow  and  green  oxides,  resulted  in  the  production 
of  a rich  intaglio  decoration  in  a greenish  or  mot- 
tled yellow  ground.  In  Europe  this  ware  is  known 
as  ‘ Sgraffito  * or  incised  pottery. 

“ The  collection  of  slip  ware  from  Pennsylvania 
here  exhibited  is  the  most  representative  and  com- 


Hmerican  pottery  ant)  porcelain  229 


plete  that  has  been  brought  together,  having  been 
formed,  by  the  writer,  before  other  investigators 
were  aware  of  its  existence.  The  pieces  were  pro- 
cured from  the  descendants  of  the  makers  and  every 
specimen  is  of  undoubted  genuineness.  The  major- 
ity of  these  have,  through  the  information  obtained 
from  their  recent  owners,  been  fully  identified  as 
coming  from  particular  potteries,  many  of  which 
seem  to  have  produced  ware  possessing  distinct 
characteristics,  which  enable  it  to  be  readily  rec- 
ognized. The  earliest  dated  example  in  the  col- 
lection was  made  in  the  year  1762,  while  the  most 
recent  bears  the  date  1849.” 

Special  attention  is  called  in  this  collection  to  a 
slip-decorated  dish  (No.  ’93-190)  seventeen  inches 
in  diameter,  with  sloping  rim  and  flat  bottom. 
The  decoration  is  the  tulip  design  and  there  are 
two  rows  of  inscription  in  old  Pennsylvania  Ger- 
man around  the  margin,  and  the  date,  1769.  The 
body  is  a buff  clay.  This  is  the  chef  d’ oeuvre  of  the 
collection.  It  was  probably  made  in  Montgomery 
County,  Pennsylvania.  The  inscription  reads : 

“ Aufrichtig  gegen  iedermann  vertrau  Dich  gen 
wo  nich  vergneugen  sein  so  vul  mann  kahn.  . . . 
Wer  ich  bin  der  bin  ich  und  dasz  ist  wahr.  A01769. 
Ich  wost  dasz  . . . sindar  . . . hab  ein  so  gar 
schoenes  bett  und  musz  schlafen  ganz  allein  solt  ich 
dan  nicht  trarich  sein  und  dasz  ist  wahr.” 


230  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  ffine  Brts 


A slip-decorated  vegetable  dish,  flat-bottomed, 
fourteen  inches  in  diameter  with  a sloping  rim,  is 
another  fine  piece.  In  the  centre  a bird  and  tulip 
are  traced  in  yellow  and  green  slips.  The  border 
is  decorated  with  plain  and  serrated  bands  of  yellow 
slip,  and  a German  inscription,  the  words  of  which 
are  separated  by  wavy  vertical  lines  in  green.  The 
ground  of  the  dish  is  a yellowish  red.  The  inscrip- 
tion reads : “ Gluck  und  Ungliick  ist  Alle  Morgen 
unser  Fruhstuck.” 

A curious  and  interesting  example  made  after  an 
old  Chinese  pattern  is  a slip  engraved  shaving  dish. 
The  ground  is  yellow  while  the  decoration  outside 
and  inside  consists  of  brown  floral  devices.  The 
following  inscription  runs  around  the  upper  margin, 
from  which  a curved  piece  has  been  cut  to  fit  the 
neck  of  the  shaver : 

“ Du  bist  von  der  art 
Das  du  hast  drei  har  ambart.” 

The  piece  was  made  by  John  Nase,  probably  before 
1830  and  is  in  a remarkably  perfect  state  of  pres- 
ervation. The  two  perforations  in  the  margin  op- 
posite the  depression  are  for  suspension. 

A remarkable  example  of  sgraffito  work  is  (No. 
’92-42)  a slip-decorated,  flat-bottomed  vegetable 
dish,  fifteen  inches  in  diameter  with  a straight  rim, 
sloping  at  an  angle,  and  three  inches  in  depth.  The 
central  decoration  is  a conventionalized  floral  design 


SLIP  - DECORATED  DISH:  PENNSYLVANIA  SGRAFFITO  DISH:  MONTGOMERY  COUNTY,  PA„  1805. 

GERMAN,  1769. 


Hmerican  potters  anfc  Porcelain  231 


of  variously  coloured  slips  and  around  the  inner 
margin  is  an  inscription  in  English.  This  is  from 
Eastern  Pennsylvania,  probably  Montgomery 
County. 

An  excellent  plate  by  John  Nase,  made  about 
1846,  is  the  slip  engraved  pie  dish  (Sgraffito)  deco- 
rated with  an  etched  figure  of  a Continental  soldier 
on  horseback  and  the  following  inscription  around 
the  rim : 

“ Ich  bin  ein  reitknecht  als  wie  ein  ber 
Ach  wan  ich  nur  im  himmel  wer.” 

A second,  earlier  plate  (1805)  is  similarly  deco- 
rated from  an  old  print  of  George  Washington,  and 
is  from  the  pottery  of  “ Johann  Neesz.” 

One  of  the  most  curious  pieces  is  a red  earthen 
ware  mug  with  two  handles.  It  stands  nine  inches 
in  height.  One  side  is  decorated  with  a rude  repre- 
sentation of  the  American  eagle,  holding  in  his 
beak  a scroll  inscribed  “ Leberty.”  On  the  reverse 
the  initials  PxK,  and  the  date,  May  5the,  1809.  On 
the  bottom  is  scratched  “ Phillip  Kline  his  Muge 
May  5the  1809.”  This  was  the  name  of  the  potter, 
who  lived  in  Bucks  County,  Pennsylvania. 

Amongst  the  very  rare  pieces  are  two  from  the 
pottery  of  Jacob  Scholl  of  Montgomery  County, 
dating  from  about  1830.  Both  are  stamped  with 
a four-petaled  flower,  of  which  only  three  so  marked 
are  known  to  collectors.  The  first  is  a slip  en- 


232  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  ot  jftne  Brts 


graved  covered  jar,  cylindrical  in  shape  and  boldly 
embellished  with  floral  designs  engraved  in  the 
white  coating,  the  leaves  and  petals  tipped  with 
green  and  blue  oxides.  The  second  piece  is  a sim- 
ilarly decorated  spherical  jar  with  blue  and  green 
flowers  boldly  done  on  a yellowish  white  slip. 

A variation  in  the  usual  type  is  to  be  noticed  in 
a slip-decorated  curved  dish,  in  which  the  central 
design  is  of  a large  pigeon  in  the  attitude  of  pluck- 
ing at  his  breast.  The  marginal  device  is  a spray 
of  large  flowers  extending  entirely  around  the 
border.  The  colour  is  yellow  on  a bright  red 
ground.  This  example  differs  from  the  slip-traced 
pieces  previously  referred  to  in  the  method  of 
decoration,  the  design  having  been  beaten  into  the 
body  before  burning.  The  potter  is  Benjamin 
Bergey  of  Montgomery  County,  and  the  period  is 
about  1830. 

These  are  but  a few  of  the  richest  specimens  of 
this  extraordinary  collection.  In  the  lower  part  of 
the  cases  are  shown  some  of  the  original  tools, 
moulds  and  other  appliances  gathered  together 
from  some  of  the  old  potteries. 

Hard  Porcelain 

The  first  hard  porcelain  manufactory  in  the 
United  States  was  that  established  about  the  year 


Bmertcan  potters  ant>  porcelain  233 


1825,  by  William  Ellis  Tucker,  in  Philadelphia. 
The  ware  resembled  the  French  porcelain  of  the 
period,  with  some  difference  in  the  composition  of 
the  paste,  and  the  French  forms  were  used  to  a 
great  extent.  The  body  of  this  ware  is  extremely 
hard  and  of  excellent  quality,  and  the  glaze  is  re- 
markably perfect.  The  decorations,  always  hand- 
painted,  are  done  over  glaze.  The  earlier  attempts 
at  embellishment  were  crude,  consisting  of  land- 
scapes in  sepia;  but  later,  when  artists  were  im- 
ported to  do  the  decorating,  it  fully  equalled  the 
best  of  that  seen  on  foreign  wares  of  the  same  grade 
and  was  done  in  colours  and  in  gold,  after  French 
and  Dresden  methods. 

The  Bulletin  of  the  Pennsylvania  Museum  pub- 
lished, April,  1906,  an  entertaining  article  by  Dr. 
Barber  on  this  manufacture,  from  which  is  quoted 
the  following: 

“ To  William  Ellis  Tucker,  of  Philadelphia,  be- 
longs the  honour  of  being  the  first  to  supply  the 
home  market  with  a purely  American  porcelain. 
The  story  of  his  remarkable  life-work  and  the  his- 
tory of  the  factory  which  he  established,  the  first 
important  one  of  its  kind  on  this  side  of  the  At- 
lantic, cannot  fail  to  prove  of  special  interest  to  the 
ceramic  student. 

“ Commencing  his  investigations  with  no  previ- 
ous knowledge  of  the  composition  of  the  ware,  nor 


234  Pennsylvania  Bcafcenty  of  fine  Brts 


of  the  processes  of  its  fabrication,  he  set  resolutely 
to  work  to  discover  its  hidden  mysteries,  and  wholly 
unaided  by  the  practical  experience  of  others,  he 
succeeded  in  a few  years  in  perfecting,  from  new 
and  untried  materials,  a porcelain  body  equal  in  all 
respects  to  the  best  which  was  being  produced  in 
Europe. 

“ His  body  was  neither  that  of  the  French  pot- 
ters nor  the  true  bone  of  the  English,  but  partook 
of  the  characteristics  of  both,  the  proportion  of 
phosphate  of  lime,  as  shown  by  analysis,  being 
about  eight  per  cent.,  a very  much  smaller  percent- 
age than  in  the  English  soft  paste. 

“ Strange  as  it  may  appear,  but  little  has  been 
published  relative  to  this  early  venture,  although 
seventy-five  years  ago  Philadelphians  justly  prided 
themselves  on  their  4 China  Factory  * and  were  in 
the  habit  of  taking  strangers  to  visit  it  as  one  of 
the  principal  points  of  interest  in  the  city.” 

William  Ellis  Tucker,  the  founder,  was  a son  of 
Benjamin  Tucker,  a member  of  the  religious  soci- 
ety of  Friends,  who  had  a china  shop  on  the  south 
side  of  Market  Street  (High  Street  in  the  old 
nomenclature)  near  where  the  Post  Office  now 
stands.  To  further  the  experiments  of  his  son  in 
decorating  and  in  attempting  to  produce  a ware 
from  the  different  clays  to  be  found  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood, he  built  a small  kiln  in  the  back  of  his 


Hmertcan  potters  ant)  porcelain  235 


property  and  here  William  spent  most  of  hfe  time, 
painting  on  the  imported  white  china  and  firing  it 
in  the  kiln,  and  in  pushing  his  investigations  to  a 
point  where  he  was  able  to  produce  a fair  quality 
of  opaque  queensware. 

His  first  serious  venture  in  the  manufacture  of 
the  ware  for  the  trade  was  in  1825,  after  his  father 
had  retired  from  business,  when  he  obtained  from 
the  city  the  old  water  works  at  the  northwest 
corner  of  Schuylkill-Front  (Twenty-third)  and 
Chestnut  Streets,  and  erected  there  the  necessary 
kilns,  etc.  Later  he  added  to  his  resources  four 
acres  of  land  on  which  a feldspar  quarry  was  situ- 
ated. 

# 

In  1828  Thomas  Hulme,  of  Philadelphia,  in- 
vested some  money  in  the  enterprise  and  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  partnership.  A number  of  pieces 
have  been  found  with  a mark  printed  in  red  beneath 
the  glaze,  “ Tucker  and  Hulme,  China  Manufac- 
turers, Philadelphia,  1828. ” This  partnership  ap- 
pears to  have  expired  at  the  end  of  a year  or  so. 

In  1832,  shortly  before  his  death,  William  Tucker 
entered  into  a second  alliance  with  Judge  Joseph 
Hemphill,  who  had  recently  returned  from  a trip  to 
Europe,  where  he  had  become  deeply  interested  in 
the  manufacture  of  porcelain.  They  purchased  a 
property  at  the  southwest  corner  of  Schuylkill- 
Sixth  (Seventeenth)  and  Chestnut  Streets,  and 


236  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  ffine  Brts 


erected  thereon  a large  factory,  a storehouse  and 
three  kilns,  greatly  increasing  the  producing  capac- 
ity of  the  works. 

After  the  death  of  the  founder,  Thomas  Tucker, 
his  brother  continued  the  superintendence  of  the 
business,  which  was  carried  on  in  the  name  of 
Joseph  Hemphill,  and  on  the  retirement  of  the  lat- 
ter, in  1837,  the  factory  was  leased  to  him  for  a 
term  of  six  months.  He  purchased  all  the  un- 
burned ware  then  on  hand  with  the  materials  and 
fixtures  and  continued  the  manufacture  of  fine  por- 
celain for  about  a year.  He  filled  a store  with  the 
products  and  then  discontinued  the  factory  and 
went  into  the  business  as  an  importer  of  fine  china 
from  Europe. 

The  products  of  the  factory  may  be  divided  into 
three  periods,  the  Tucker  period,  from  1825  to 
1828;  the  Tucker  and  Hulme  period,  during  the 
year  1828,  and  the  Tucker  and  Hemphill  period, 
from  1832  to  1838. 

Of  the  first  period,  examples  are  now  very  rare. 
The  paste  is  yellowish  and  the  decoration  crude  and 
inartistic,  while  frequently  there  is  no  decoration 
at  all.  Such  painting  as  was  attempted  was  done 
by  hand  in  sepia  or  brown  monochrome  and  the 
favourite  representations  were  landscapes,  butter- 
flies and  the  like  done  with  a few  strokes  of  the 
brush  and  with  but  little  variety.  The  numerous 


Hmerican  pottery  ant>  porcelain  237 


examples  in  the  Museum  collection  show  the  influ- 
ence of  the  English  potters  in  the  shapes  of  coffee- 
pots, tea-pots,  cups  and  saucers,  etc.,  while  other 
pieces  are  entirely  original  in  design. 

During  the  time  when  Thomas  Hulme  was  con- 
nected with  the  works  (1828)  considerable  im- 
provement was  made  in  the  decoration  of  the  ware. 
A pitcher  of  this  period  in  the  Museum  collection 
is  decorated  only  with  gold  bands  and  the  initials 
C.  B.  having  been  made  for  Charles  Burd.  It  bears 
the  mark  of  Tucker  and  Hulme,  with  the  date,  1828, 
in  red. 

Soon  after  the  business  passed  into  the  hands  of 
Judge  Hemphill,  artists  and  artisans  were  brought 
over  from  France,  England  and  Germany  and  a 
more  pretentious  style  of  decoration  was  intro- 
duced, although  for  a time  sepia  landscapes  con- 
tinued to  be  used  in  combination  with  gold.  French 
methods  of  decoration  came  much  into  vogue  at  this 
time.  The  ware  was  sold  very  extensively  to  the 
well-to-do  people  in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey 
and  nearly  every  family  of  prominence  or  wealth 
had  table  services  or  pieces  made  to  order,  and 
decorated  with  initials,  monograms,  medallions  or 
armorial  bearings,  usually  enclosed  in  wreaths  of 
flowers  or  gold  tracery. 

The  ware  of  this  best  period  is  very  similar  to  the 
contemporary  French  porcelain  but  has  a bluer  tint. 


238  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  jfine  Brts 

The  Museum  possesses  the  largest  collection  of 
Tucker  and  Hemphill  porcelain  in  existence,  with 
the  original  pattern  books  of  the  factory,  showing 
in  black  and  white,  and  in  colours,  every  shape  and 
pattern  produced. 

The  collection  begins  with  the  early  productions 
of  this  manufacture  decorated  with  painted  land- 
scapes in  sepia  or  brown,  and  ends  with  a fine  series 
of  pitchers  and  vases,  exquisitely  painted  in  colours. 
Amongst  the  rarest  pieces  is  a large  water  pitcher 
with  coloured  landscapes  and  two  vase-shaped 
pitchers,  one  bearing  a portrait  of  Washington 
and  the  other  a fine  view  of  the  Upper  Ferry 
Bridge.  The  first  is  a Hemphill  pitcher,  impressed 
on  the  bottom  with  the  letter  F,  the  private  mark 
of  Charles  Frederick,  a moulder  at  these  works. 
On  one  side  is  a coloured  medallion  portrait  of 
Washington,  painted  from  an  enamel  by  Birch 
after  Stuart’s  portrait,  known  as  the  Vaughan  type. 
On  the  opposite  side  is  a landscape  in  colours,  with 
a flagstaff  flying  the  American  flag.  Above  and 
below  are  heavy  gold  bands. 

The  second  Hemphill  pitcher  is  similar  in  shape 
and  decorated  on  the  sides  with  festoons  of  flowers 
in  natural  colours.  On  the  front  is  a painting  of 
the  bridge  which  once  spanned  the  Schuylkill  River 
at  Callow-hill  Street.  This  famous  bridge  was 
opened  in  1813  and  destroyed  by  fire  in  1838,  and 


Bmertcan  pottery  anfc>  porcelain  239 


figures  on  much  of  the  historical  china  made  at  this 
time.  The  view  was  made  from  an  engraving  after 
the  painting  by  Thomas  Birch.  The  date  of  the 
piece  is  about  1833.  It  was  presented  by  Mr.  John 
T.  Morris. 

In  the  collection  of  hard  porcelain  are  several 
examples  made  by  Kurlbaum  and  Schwartz  in  Phila- 
delphia, about  1853.  These  are  decorated  entirely 
in  gold  and  supposed  to  be  the  only  examples  of  this 
ware  known  to  collectors.  The  catalogue  claims 
them  as  “ in  some  respects  the  finest  examples  of 
hard  porcelain  table  ware  ever  produced  in  Amer- 
ica.” 

An  interesting  example  of  soft  paste  porcelain  is 
an  amphora-shaped  vase,  in  white  ware,  undeco- 
rated, the  handles  moulded  in  the  form  of  female 
figures.  It  was  made  in  New  York,  probably  by 
Dr.  Mead,  in  1816,  and  is  claimed  as  the  oldest 
known  piece  of  soft  porcelain  made  in  the  United 
States. 

A series  of  Parian  figures  and  busts  were  made 
for  the  Centennial  Exposition  by  James  Carr,  at  the 
New  York  City  Pottery,  and  are  preserved  by  the 
Museum,  and  its  collection  of  Majolica  includes 
some  of  the  first  pieces  made  in  this  country  by  Mr. 
Carr,  and  a representative  series  from  the  now  ex- 
tinct pottery  at  Phoenixville. 

In  the  collection  of  white,  opaque  ware,  may  be 


240  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  ot  ffine  Hrts 


seen  the  oldest  known  piece  of  American  White 
ware,  made  in  Philadelphia  about  1770.  It  is  an 
open  work  fruit  basket,  decorated  in  blue,  under  the 
glaze,  and  raised  rosettes  touched  with  blue.  It  is 
from  the  China  Works  of  Bonnin  and  Morris  in 
Southwark,  and  was  deposited  by  Dr.  James  Mease 
in  the  Franklin  Institute  in  1841,  with  a letter  giv- 
ing its  history. 

The  tall  black  vase,  decorated  with  a full-length 
painting  of  Stephen  Girard,  is  a rare  example  of 
Philadelphia  pottery,  made  in  1851  by  Ralph  Bag- 
nail  Beech. 

Under  the  title  of  American  Faience  the  Mu- 
seum classes  a group  of  underglaze  opaque  ware 
made  in  the  United  States  during  the  past  twenty 
years  or  more,  notably  from  the  Keramic  Art 
Works  of  Chelsea,  Massachusetts;  the  Rookwood 
Pottery  of  Cincinnati  and  the  Lonhuda  ware  of 
Steubenville,  Ohio.  This  collection  numbers  about 
fifty  pieces.  There  is  also  a good  collection  of 
American  stone  ware  and  an  interesting  group  of 
about  twenty  pieces  of  yellow  and  Rockingham 
wares. 

The  latter  was  first  made  in  the  United  States  by 
James  Bennett  at  East  Liverpool,  Ohio,  in  1839.  It 
was  a reproduction  of  a ware  made  at  the  Swinton 
Works,  on  the  estate  of  the  Marquis  of  Rocking- 
ham, about  1796,  and  at  that  time  in  high  repute. 


Bmertcan  potters  ant)  porcelain  241 


It  possesses  the  same  body  as  the  ordinary  yedlow 
ware,  but  is  covered  with  a brown  or  mottled  yel- 
low and  brown  glaze.  Though  now  a despised 
material,  used  only  for  the  most  inelegant  of  kitchen 
crockery,  it  was  once  greatly  in  vogue  and  the  pieces 
preserved  by  the  Museum  are  quaint  and  interesting. 

The  Rockingham  tea-pot,  'with  its  familiar  design 
of  “ Rebecca  at  the  Well,”  was  first  made  by  E.  and 
W.  Bennett,  Baltimore,  about  1851.  A flint  enam- 
elled “ Toby  Mug,”  made  at  the  United  States  Pot- 
tery by  Messrs.  Lyman  and  Fenton,  Bennington, 
Vermont,  is  an  interesting  and  curious  specimen. 
The  handle  is  in  the  form  of  a human  leg  and  foot. 

At  the  north  side  of  the  building  is  a room  de- 
voted to  Aboriginal  American  pottery,  in  which 
are  exhibited  collections  of  painted  and  polished 
pottery  of  the  Pueblo  Indians  of  New  Mexico  and 
Arizona,  and  containing  mortuary  pottery  of  the 
Florida  Indians  and  a case  of  Mound  Builders’ 
pottery  from  the  ancient  mounds  of  the  Mississippi 
Valley,  both  given  by  Mr.  Garence  B.  Moore. 


CHAPTER  XVI 


AMERICAN  AND  FOREIGN  GLASSWARE 

A second  extremely  important  department  of  the 
Museum  is  that  devoted  to  American  glassware. 
This  collection  illustrates  the  various  processes  of 
glass  making  in  this  country,  and  includes  repre- 
sentative examples  of  blown,  cut,  pressed,  enam- 
elled, silvered,  stained,  cameo  and  intaglio  carved 
glass;  and  covers  a period  of  about  three  hundred 
years. 

The  history  of  the  manufacture  of  glass  in  this 
country  is  ably  treated  in  an  article  by  the  Director 
of  the  Museum  in  the  Bulletin  for  January,  1906. 
Dr.  Barber  says: 

“ The  first  industrial  enterprise  established  in  the 
territory  of  the  present  United  States,  as  stated  by 
Prof.  Lyon  G.  Tyler  in  his  4 Cradle  of  the  Republic,’ 
was  a glass  bottle  factory,  erected  in  the  Virginia 
colony  soon  after  October,  1608.  Eight  glass- 
workers,  Welshmen  and  Poles,  were  brought  over 
to  operate  it.  The  house  stood  in  the  woods  about 
half  a mile  northwest  from  Jamestown,  near  Pow- 
hatan Creek.  This  manufacture  seems  to  have 


242 


Hmerican  ant)  foreign  Glassware  243 


proved  unsuccessful,  and  a second  glass  house  was 
erected  in  1621.  In  this  year  Capt.  Wm.  Norton 
brought  to  Virginia  four  Italians  to  manufacture 
all  kinds  of  glass,  among  which  were  beads  for  trade 
with  the  Indians.  In  1625  two  glass  workers,  Ber- 
nardo and  Vincenzo,  w*ere  enumerated  in  the  census. 
The  latter,  desiring  to  return  to  Europe,  is  said  to 
have  broken  the  furnace  with  his  crowbar.  Soon 
after  this  the  glass  house  fell  into  disuse  and  some 
years  later  it  was  sold.  . . . 

“ So  far  as  we  know  there  has  been  no  attempt  by 
historians  to  describe  the  products  of  this  early  es- 
tablishment. Recent  investigations  by  the  writer, 
however,  have  resulted  in  the  discovery  that  ex- 
amples of  glass  beads  have  from  time  to  time  been 
found  on  the  site  of  the  old  glass  house,  or  have 
been  picked  up  on  the  shore  of  the  river  in  the 
neighbourhood,  where  they  had  been  washed  up  at 
high  water. 

“ A number  of  these  beads,  fully  authenticated, 
have  recently  been  secured  for  this  museum. 
Among  these  most  interesting  examples  of  seven- 
teenth century  workmanship,  which  were  origi- 
nally of  globular  form  and  about  the  size  of  an  aver- 
age pea,  are  several  of  dull  blue  colour  covered  with 
minute  longitudinal  striations,  while  others  are 
transparent  and  of  a pale  pinkish  or  greenish  tint 
ribbed  with  broad  lines  of  white*  somewhat  resem- 


244  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  fine  arts 


bling  in  appearance  a small  gooseberry.  Some  of 
them  have  been  so  worn  by  the  action  of  the  water 
that  they  have  been  reduced  to  half  or  quarter  of 
their  original  size,  while  others  are  coated  with  a 
beautiful  iridescent  patination  caused  by  three  cen- 
turies of  exposure  to  the  action  of  the  elements.” 

That  the  manufacture  of  more  ambitious  pieces 
was  attempted  by  the  Jamestown  glass  works  seems 
clear  from  various  fragments  in  the  possession  of 
the  Museum,  but  the  industry  appears  to  have  been 
in  advance  of  its  time  and  languished  for  want  of 
patronage. 

The  Museum  preserves  a series  of  examples  of 
flint  glass  made  by  Baron  Henry  William  Stiegel, 
at  Manheim,  Lancaster  County,  Pennsylvania,  from 
about  1762  to  1774.  Stiegel  came  to  this  country 
from  Manheim,  Baden,  Germany,  in  1750,  and  his 
glass  house  is  supposed  to  have  been  the  first  flint 
glass  manufactory  in  America.  The  product  of  the 
factory,  as  we  know  it  from  the  specimens  which 
have  come  down  to  us  from  the  homes  of  the  well- 
to-do  people  of  that  day,  was  the  flint  or  lead  glass 
known  in  Europe  as  Crystal,  and  included  blown 
glass,  ornamented  by  etched  or  engraved  designs  of 
tulips  and  other  floral  devices.  In  these  pieces  the 
cutting  and  flowering  was  done  with  a wheel  or 
sharp  instrument. 

The  Stiegel  glassware  was  of  a higher  grade  than 


Hmerican  ant>  fforeian  Glassware  245 


any  produced  in  the  country  down  to  the  period 
when  the  manufacture  ceased,  and  although  the 
works  were  only  operated  for  a period  of  about  ten 
years  their  output  must  have  been  considerable,  as 
a goodly  number  of  identified  pieces  are  cherished 
by  collectors. 

The  works  were  situated  in  the  village  founded  by 
Baron  Stiegel  where,  during  his  days  of  affluence, 
he  lived  in  comparative  pomp  and  splendour.  “ As 
he  rode  home  at  sunset,  after  spending  a day  in 
superintending  his  enterprises,  he  was  accustomed  to 
being  saluted  at  the  entrance  of  his  park  by  the 
firing  of  cannon  and  welcomed  by  music  played  by 
a band  of  musicians  stationed  on  the  roof  of  his 
house.  The  interior  of  the  building  was  furnished 
sumptuously.  One  room  contained  a large  fireplace 
lined  with  old  Dutch  tiles,  some  of  which  may  now 
be  seen  in  the  rooms  of  the  Historical  Society  of 
Pennsylvania.” 

An  interesting  account  of  Baron  Stiegel’s  enter- 
prises was  published  by  Dr.  J.  H.  Sieling  in  1896. 
The  writer  states  that  the  products  of  the  Man- 
heim  glass  works  were  vases,  sugar  and  finger 
bowls,  salts,  flasks,  pitchers,  tumblers,  wine  glasses 
and  toys. 

It  has  been  discovered  within  recent  years  that 
pressed  glass  was  made  in  this  country  as  early  as 
1827  and  that  the  industry  continued  until  1840. 


246  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  ot  fine  Brts 


An  example  of  American  pressed  glass  preserved 
by  the  Museum  is  one  of  a series  of  salt  cellars 
pressed  into  the  shape  of  a steamboat  and  evidently 
designed  as  a souvenir  of  the  visit  of  General 
Lafayette  to  this  country  in  1824.  The  specimen 
in  this  collection  is  in  a rich  dark  blue  glass  and  on 
the  side  wheels  of  the  boat  is  the  name  “ Lafayet  ” 
in  raised  letters  while  on  the  stern  are  the  initials 
“ B.  & S.  Co.,”  which  is  identified  as  the  mark  of 
the  old  Boston  and  Sandwich  Glass  Company,  at 
Sandwich,  Massachusetts,  to  which  have  been 
traced  also  several  special  designs  in  glass  cup 
plates,  popular  among  collectors. 

The  Museum’s  collection  of  American  glass 
flasks  and  bottles  with  historical  designs  in  relief 
is  of  particular  rarity  and  interest.  It  contains  a 
practically  complete  series  of  bottles  produced  at 
American  factories  from  1825  to  1870.  Several  of 
the  original  iron  blowing  moulds  in  which  these 
bottles  were  made  are  shown  in  the  lower  part  of 
the  case  devoted  to  this  special  exhibit. 

Some  of  the  earliest  objects  of  this  character 
were  produced  at  Coventry,  Connecticut,  in  1813, 
when  a glass  factory  was  started  in  that  place,  in 
which  decanters,  tumblers,  bottles,  pocket  flasks, 
snuff  canisters,  inkstands,  vases  and  chemists’ 
phials  and  jars  were  manufactured.  Flasks  of 
various  sizes  were  made  from  1820  to  1830  with 


Hmerfcan  a nfc  foreign  Glassware  247 


portraits  of  Lafayette  and  Governor  DeWitt  Clin- 
ton, in  commemoration  of  the  opening  of  the  Erie 
Canal  in  1825.  These  flasks  were  coloured 
sapphire  blue,  green,  brown  and  amber. 

Flasks  were  made  in  commemoration  of  the  open- 
ing of  the  first  railroads  in  1830.  One  of  these 
shows  a horse  drawing  a heavily  laden  four-wheel 
car  along  a rail  and  another  varieity  depicts  a 
primitive  engine.  Both  bear  the  inscription,  “ Suc- 
cess to  the  Railroad/’  lettered  about  the  margin. 
These  are  attributed  to  the  Kensington  Glass 
Works,  Philadelphia. 

The  Museum  has  recently  come  into  possession 
of  some  exceedingly  interesting  specimens  of  the 
earliest  cut  glass  made  in  the  United  States.  These 
include  a decanter,  wine  glasses,  tumbler  and  water 
pitcher  cut  in  the  strawberry  diamond  pattern, 
made  in  Pittsburgh  in  1828  for  presentation  from 
that  city  to  Mr.  Frederick  Graff,  a noted  Philadel- 
phia engineer  who,  in  the  early  part  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  gave  to  Pittsburgh  some  valuable 
aid  in  the  formation  of  its  municipal  water  system. 

The  set  is  a gift  from  Miss  Henrietta  Graff,  a 
daughter  of  Frederick  Graff. 

A cut  glass  punch  bowl,  decanters,  candlesticks 
and  tall  champagne  and  wine  glasses,  presented  by 
Miss  Henrietta  Ritchie  and  Mr.  Craig  D.  Ritchie, 
are  from  the  manufactory  of  John  and  Craig 


248  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  fine  arts 


Ritchie  at  Ritchietown,  now  part  of  the  city  of 
Wheeling,  West  Virginia,  and  were  made  about  the 
year  1835. 

The  general  exhibits  of  glass  include  the  John  T. 
Morris  collection  of  modern  Italian  glass,  several 
cases  of  English,  French,  Bohemian  and  Venetian 
glass;  a case  of  old  cut  glass  and  a remarkably 
fine  series  of  Tiffany  Favrile  glass,  the  greater  part 
of  which  was  purchased  at  the  Paris  Exposition  of 
1900,  with  the  income  of  the  Temple  Bequest. 

“ In  one  of  the  cases  will  be  seen  several  exquis- 
ite examples  of  carved  cameo  glass,  the  work  of  the 
late  Emile  Galle.  The  most  noteworthy  of  these  is 
a glass  vase  of  moss-agate-like,  or  opalescent,  sub- 
stance, beneath  the  surface  of  which  are  scattered 
brown  and  white  dendritic  mottlings  which,  in  one 
place,  have  taken  the  form  of  the  outstretched 
wings  and  a portion  of  the  body  of  a dragon  fly. 
M.  Galle  has  seized  upon  this  suggestion  for  a mo- 
tive, to  perfect  in  the  glass  and  on  the  surface  a 
most  realistic  design  of  a large  dragon  fly.  The 
gauze-like  effect  of  the  wings  has  been  increased 
by  engraving  on  the  surface,  immediately  above  the 
mottling  in  the  glass,  the  delicate  outlines  and  vein- 
ings  of  the  wings,  while  to  complete  the  design  he 
has  added  on  the  surface  the  long  jointed  body  of 
the  insect,  which  is  made  more  realistic  by  silvery 
and  opalescent  effects.  For  the  eyes  he  has  added 


Bmerlcan  a nfc  fforeion  Glassware  249 


two  topaz-tinted  globes.  The  vase  itself  is  an  ex- 
cellent representation  of  water  and  air,  the  lower 
part  having  a pale  blue  and  iridescent  colouring, 
while  the  upper  portion  gives  the  impression  of  at- 
mosphere, in  which  the  dragon  fly  is  poised,  while 
the  brown  and  white  mottlings  are  suggestive  of 
clouds.”  (’05-46.) 


CHAPTER  XVII 


MEXICAN  MAJOLICA 

An  important  feature  of  the  Museum  is  its  col- 
lection of  Mexican  Majolica,  all  of  which  has  been 
accumulated  since  1906,  when  the  first  article  on 
stanniferous  faience  in  Mexico  was  published  by 
Dr.  Barber  in  the  Bulletin  of  the  Pennsylvania 
Museum  in  the  July  issue  for  that  year.  This  arti- 
cle was  inspired  by  a small  collection  of  old  Puebla 
ware  which  had  recently  come  into  the  possession 
of  the  Museum.  The  collection  included  tiles  from 
early  cemeteries,  churches  and  other  buildings, 
coarsely  decorated  with  blue  designs  composed  of 
conventionalized  flower  forms,  animals  and  human 
figures.  There  were  decorated  drug  jars  and 
spherical  vases  in  blue;  salt  cellars  and  a curious 
little  benitier  or  device  for  holding  holy  water,  in 
colours,  and  as  the  most  interesting  example  of  all, 
a bowl,  fifteen  inches  in  diameter,  of  late  seventeenth 
or  early  eighteenth  century  workmanship.  Others 
with  rude  paintings  of  Chinamen  in  blue  were  taken 
from  an  old  house  in  Puebla  which  was  erected  in 
1687,  and  some  were  from  an  Indian  Church  at 

250 


/IDextcan  rt&ajoiica  251 

Tlaxcalancinco,  near  Cholula,  and  date  back  to 
1789. 

There  were  various  theories  as  to  the  origin  of 
the  ware,  one  being  that  Chinese  potters  had 
brought  the  art  over  from  the  Philippines,  until 
proof  was  established  to  the  contrary  in  one  of  the 
pieces  in  this  Museum.  The  specimen  in  question 
is  a large  vase  in  blue  decoration,  around  the  body 
of  which  are  rudely  painted  human  figures,  male 
and  female,  with  long  queues.  It  was  argued  that 
“ no  Oriental  artist  would  depict  Chinese  women 
with  hair  so  arranged.” 

The  announcement  of  this  important  discovery 
aroused  widespread  interest  among  students  of 
ceramics  all  over  the  world  and  as  a result  Dr.  Bar- 
ber made  a trip  to  Mexico  in  1907  for  the  purpose 
of  studying  the  ware  and  collecting  data  relative  to 
its  history. 

Isolated  examples  of  the  ware,  supposed  to  be  of 
Spanish  origin,  had  been  brought  back  from  time 
to  time  by  travellers  in  Mexico,  but  these  occa- 
sional pieces  picked  up  in  out  of  the  way  country 
places  and  in  curio  shops  in  the  city  of  Mexico,  had 
escaped  the  vigilance  of  experts  and  remained  un- 
identified in  private  collections  until  a group  of 
what  purported  to  be  native  porcelain  was  offered 
for  sale  in  Mexico  and  upon  investigation  proved 
to  be  tin  enamelled  pottery.  Soon  after  several 


252  jpennsElvmnia  Hcafcems  of  tfine  arts 


similar  pieces  were  observed  in  a small  collection 
of  pottery  accumulated  in  Mexico  by  Dr.  Denman 
Ross,  of  Cambridge,  Massachusetts,  and  exhibited 
in  the  Boston  Museum  of  Fine  Arts. 

No  definite  information  could  be  obtained  as  to 
the  origin  of  these  pieces.  By  some  they  were  called 
“ Talavera  ” ware  on  account  of  their  supposed  im- 
portation from  Talavera,  Spain,  while  others  main- 
tained that  the  name  was  derived  from  that  of  a 
noted  potter.  The  best  theory  was  that  workmen 
had  been  brought  from  Talavera  by  the  Dominican 
friars,  who  settled  in  Mexico  soon  after  the  year 
1600  and  established  potteries  at  Puebla. 

A correspondence  followed  between  Dr.  Barber 
and  various  persons  in  Mexico  of  which  the  out- 
come was  the  discovery  that  stanniferous  faience 
had  been  produced  in  Mexico,  chiefly  in  Puebla, 
under  Spanish  influence,  and  that  some  centuries 
ago  numerous  majolica  factories  had  flourished. 
About  this  time  the  above  mentioned  pieces  were 
acquired  for  the  Museum  and  about  this  nucleus 
the  present  remarkable  collection  has  grown. 

In  a comprehensive  handbook  on  “ The  Majolica 
of  Mexico,”  by  Edwin  AtLee  Barber,  Philadelphia, 
1908,  we  find  the  following: 

“ Immediately  after  the  conquest  of  Mexico,  in 
1520,  Spain  began  to  graft  her  civilization  on  the 
ruder  civilization  of  the  New  World.  The  flower 


/Ibexican  flbajolica 


253 


of  her  clergy,  soldiery  and  artisans  poured  into 
the  new  El  Dorado,  where  they  at  once  established 
the  printing  press  and  introduced  the  industrial 
methods  of  the  Old  World.  Factories  for  the  man- 
ufacture of  staple  goods  were  erected  at  many 
places.  The  natives  of  Mexico,  already  skilful 
craftsmen,  soon  came  to  excel  their  teachers  in  pro- 
ficiency, and  in  a few  years  New  Spain  had  be- 
come independent  of  Europe  in  the  various  indus- 
trial arts.  During  the  eighty  years  between  the  date 
of  the  Conquest  and  the  close  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, greater  progress  was  made  in  Mexico  in  litera- 
ture, architecture  and  the  other  useful  arts,  than 
in  any  other  country  on  the  Western  Continent  in 
a similar  period.  . . . 

“ From  the  meagre  references  to  the  pottery  in- 
dustry, found  in  the  early  literature  of  Mexico  and 
the  manuscript  archives  of  the  city  of  Puebla,  com- 
bined with  the  results  of  a careful  study  of  the 
ancient  majolica  and  tile-work  which  have  survived, 
we  learn  that  previous  to  the  year  1580  Spanish 
potters  were  plying  their  trade  in  Mexico  and  in- 
structing the  natives  in  the  mysteries  of  the  art. 
The  first  Spanish  clay- worker  in  the  New  World 
initiated  the  Mexicans  into  the  secret  of  glazing  the 
ware  with  tin  and  oxide  of  lead. 

“ Two  distinct  influences  were  at  work  in  the 
ceramic  art  in  New  Spain,  first  the  Spanish,  through 


254  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


the  potters  of  Talavera,  and  later  the  Chinese 
through  the  extensive  importation  of  Oriental  por- 
celains during  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  cen- 
turies. The  manufacture  seems  to  have  been  con- 
fined to  the  city  of  Puebla  until  a recent  period, 
when  potteries  were  established  in  Oaxaca  for  the 
production  of  ordinary  commercial  ware. 

“ The  manufacture  of  decorative  tiles  was  com- 
menced at  an  early  date,  probably  before  1575,  as 
is  clearly  proved  by  the  extensive  use  of  tile-work 
in  many  of  the  oldest  churches  and  convents  in  New 
Spain.” 

In  1653  a potters’  guild  was  organized  which 
lasted  about  thirteen  years,  but  for  the  best  part  of 
a century  the  industry  flourished  untrammelled,  with 
the  result  that  a rich  variety  of  styles  was  developed 
and  each  potter’s  work  is  marked  by  great  individu- 
ality. 

The  golden  age  of  the  art  appears  to  have  been 
from  about  1650  to  1750,  during  which  period  the 
number  of  potteries  increased  from  ten  or  twelve 
to  about  thirty.  Too  much  prosperity  worked  the 
usual  mischief  and  the  period  of  greatest  activity 
was  the  forerunner  of  a decadence  which  set  in 
about  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century,  when 
the  art  began  rapidly  to  decline  and  by  the  middle 
of  the  nineteenth  century  had  reached  its  lowest 
ebb. 


ZlDeiican  /iDajolica 


255 


The  Majolica  of  Mexico  may  be  classified  under 
four  heads:  the  Moresque,  1575-1700;  the  Spanish, 
or  Talavera,  1600-1800;  the  Chinese,  1650-1800, 
and  the  Hispano-Mexican,  or  Pueblan,  1800-1860. 

Examples  of  the  earliest  of  these  styles,  showing 
Moorish  or  Hispano-Moresque,  are  very  scarce. 
The  decoration  is  characterized  by  interlacing  scroll- 
work or  strapwork  and  the  Museum  preserves  a 
magnificent  example  in  the  lavabo  or  large  bowl  of 
this  character,  from  the  old  Mexican  Convent  of 
San  Francisco,  at  Atlixco,  which  dates  back  to  the 
early  part  of  the  seventeenth  century.  It  is  covered 
with  a handsome  scrollwork  design  in  blue  with 
black  outlines.  “ The  central  pattern  is  purely  Moor- 
ish in  spirit,  both  in  composition  and  colouring, 
variations  of  this  treatment  being  still  employed  by 
the  modern  Moorish  potters.  The  question  has  been 
raised  whether  this  piece  was  made  in  Mexico  or  was 
brought  from  Spain.  A careful  examination  of  the 
workmanship  clearly  shows  that  it  differs  from  na- 
tive Moorish  work  in  the  treatment  of  the  colours, 
the  blue  being  thick  and  standing  out  in  perceptible 
relief,  which  was  a marked  characteristic  of  the 
Mexican  ware  of  that  and  the  following  century.” 

This  superb  piece  has  been  assigned  to  the  begin- 
ning of  the  best  period  of  the  art,  about  1650,  and 
is  one  of  the  earliest  specimens  in  the  Museum. 
There  is  something  remarkably  strong  and  virile  in 


256  pennsslpanta  Bca&emB  of  fine  arts 

the  decoration,  and  the  colour,  too,  is  rich  and  hand- 
some. 

A fine  example  of  old  Mexican  majolica  showing 
Spanish  influence,  made  in  Puebla  between  1680  and 
1700,  was  added  to  the  Museum’s  collection  in  1910. 
This  is  a convent  or  church  laver  or  basin,  twenty- 
five  inches  in  diameter  and  six  and  a half  inches  in 
depth  and  decorated  on  the  interior  in  blue  in  the 
“ tattooed  ” style.  In  the  centre  is  a large  figure  of 
St.  Michael  with  a plumed  head  dress  and  flowing 
robes  holding  in  his  right  hand  a banner.  Three 
cherubs’  heads  are  seen  below  his  feet.  The  rest  of 
the  surface  is  filled  in  with  a spotted  ornamentation 
in  which  may  be  descried  foliage,  birds,  houses,  etc. 
The  beautiful  deep,  rich  blue  is  characteristic  of  the 
Mexican  majolica  of  the  late  seventeenth  century, 
and  the  decoration  shows  strong  Spanish  influence. 
The  edge  of  the  bowl  is  serrated  at  regular  distances 
by  a series  of  five  depressions  or  thumb-marks  in 
the  soft  clay.  The  outside  is  ornamented  with  blue 
designs  of  a floral  and  geometrical  character,  all 
rather  quaint  and  archaic.  The  forms  are  outlined 
in  light  blue,  filled  in  with  this  spotted  sort  of  deco- 
ration, which  was  one  of  three  or  four  distinct  styles 
of  painting  in  vogue  at  Puebla  in  the  last  quarter  of 
the  seventeenth  century. 

This  class  of  work  is  found  on  tiles,  bowls,  alba- 
relli,  barrel-shaped  vases  or  jardinieres,  spherical 


/IDexican  /l&ajoltca 


257 


jars  and  sometimes  on  other  objects.  One  of  the 
best  of  the  bowls  that  is  known  is  that  in  the  Mu- 
seum collection  — a shallow  bowl,  fifteen  inches  in 
diameter,  in  blue  decoration,  in  which  a crudely 
drawn  hare  is  springing  across  the  centre  of  the 
picture.  This  fine  piece  is  supposed  to  have  been 
produced  previous  to  the  year  1700,  at  the  time 
when  Puebla  was  influenced  by  both  Talavera  and 
Moresque  workmanship.  The  birds  and  hare  are 
Talaverian  while  the  Moorish  influence  is  shown  in 
the  three  mosque-shaped  buildings. 

A large  proportion  of  the  majolica  produced  in 
Puebla  between  about  1650  and  1800  reflects  in 
form  and  ornament  the  methods  of  Chinese  potters. 
This,  Dr.  Barber  claims,  shows  plainly  the  bungling 
efforts  of  Spanish  or  Mexican  decorators  to  imitate 
Chinese  work  and  repudiates  the  theory  that  the 
pseudo-Chinese  decorations  of  the  Mexican  wares 
were  executed  by  Oriental  artists,  as  has  been 
urged. 

A very  fine  example  of  this  kind  is  a large  jar- 
shaped  vase  of  Chinese  form,  painted  in  blue 
camaieu.  The  date  assigned  is  1660  and  the  piece 
is  important  as  showing  the  transmission  of  Italian 
influence  through  Spain,  in  combination  with  Ori- 
ental figure  motives.  The  drawing  of  the  chariot 
and  horses  suggests  the  Italian  style  and  the  figure 
of  the  driver  is  inspired  by  the  Chinese.  The  vase 


258  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


stands  eighteen  and  a half  inches  high  and  is  one 
of  the  finest  pieces  in  the  collection. 

Having  absorbed  the  teachings  of  the  original 
workers  in  this  style  of  pottery,  the  Pueblans  began 
about  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  to 
develop  a manner  of  their  own  and  increased  materi- 
ally the  range  of  their  colours  so  that  on  ware  of 
this  period  one  finds  painting  in  blue,  green,  red, 
brown  and  black.  Chinese  influence  had  entirely 
disappeared  and  figure  painting  in  gaudy  colours 
came  into  vogue.  The  best  example  of  this  kind 
that  has  come  to  light  is  the  large  vase  shown  in 
the  illustration  herewith,  owned  by  the  Pennsylvania 
Museum. 

Another  excellent  piece  is  a majolica  jardiniere, 
eighteen  inches  in  height,  decorated  in  polychrome, 
made  in  Puebla  about  1800.  It  is  adorned  with 
flowers  and  vines  in  rose  colour  and  green. 

In  1908  the  Museum  acquired  a most  interesting 
collection  of  majolica  tiles  of  Mexico,  of  the  six- 
teenth, seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries,  from 
old  churches  and  convents  of  Mexico.  These  are 
rich  in  colouring  and  design  and  form  a most  impor- 
tant adjunct  to  the  general  collections  of  the  majol- 
ica of  Mexico. 

Sgraffito  earthenware,  similar  in  process  to  that 
employed  by  Italian  potters  and  identical  with  that 
of  the  Pennsylvania-German  potters  of  the  eight- 


MEXICAN  MAJOLICA  VASE,  DECORATED  IN  BLUE  MEXICAN  MAJOLICA  VASE,  POLYCHROME 

CAMAIEU.  PUEBLA,  ABOUT  1660.  DECORATION.  PUEBLA,  ABOUT  1780. 


/IDextcan  jflDajoltca 


259 


eenth  century,  was  produced  in  Mexico  at  Guana- 
juato. A dish  of  this  character,  made  about  1830,  is 
preserved  by  the  Museum. 

The  Museum  preserves  on  deposit  from  Mrs.  Cor- 
nelius Stevenson,  the  assistant  curator  of  the  Mu- 
seum, an  old  Mexican  Bandeja,  or  tray,  from  the 
Convent  of  the  Encarnation,  in  the  City  of  Mexico. 
The  tray  was  offered  for  sale  by  the  sisters  of  the 
convent,  at  the  time  of  the  confiscation  of  clergy 
property,  under  President  Juarez.  The  sisters  de- 
scribed it  as  an  Aztec  relic,  though  it  is  shown  by 
the  nature  of  the  decoration  to  be  of  the  period  after 
the  Conquest  and  under  Spanish  influence. 

The  Bandeja  measures  three  feet  in  diameter 
and  is  hollowed  to  a depth  of  four  inches  out  of  one 
section  of  a cypress  tree.  This  tree,  known  as  the 
“ ahuehuetl  ” by  the  ancient  Mexicans,  still  survives 
to  some  extent  in  the  Valley  of  Mexico,  though 
many  were  cut  down  at  the  time  of  the  Mexican  in- 
vasion. The  tray  appears  to  have  been  rudely 
chipped  out  with  a gouge,  and  is  varnished  with  a 
crude  lacquer  of  copal.  The  decoration  is  a florid 
design  of  red  shaded  flowers  and  foliage  of  a green- 
ish brown  hue  and  conventionalized  representations 
of  birds  and  animals,  this  divided  into  seven  zones 
and  the  whole  intermingled  with  a profuse  applica- 
tion of  gilding. 

In  the  centre  is  a double-headed  bird  with  a crown 


260  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  of  JFtne  Brts 


set  between  the  two  heads.  This  form  of  bird  was 
probably  adopted  by  the  native  Mexican  artist  from 
the  Austrian  double-headed  eagle,  then  the  emblem 
of  the  King  of  Spain.  The  Austrian  Dynasty  of 
Spain  reigned  over  that  country  and  its  colonies 
from  1517,  when  Charles  V ascended  the  throne, 
and  continued  to  hold  sway  until  1700.  When 
Maximilian  reigned  over  the  country  he  adopted 
the  single-headed  eagle,  and  according  to  good  au- 
thority ancient  objects  decorated  with  the  double- 
headed bird  date  prior  to  1700.  This  magnificent 
piece  then  may  be  assigned  to  that  time. 

As  an  object  the  Bandeja  is  absolutely  unique 
and  its  authenticity  is  established  by  a voucher 
signed  by  the  Mother  Superior  of  the  Convent 
from  which  it  comes,  countersigned  by  the  accred- 
ited representative  of  the  family  to  which  the  tray 
originally  belonged.  This  family  was  the  ruling 
power  of  Texcoco  at  the  time  of  the  Conquest. 
The  piece  was  purchased  by  Mrs.  Edward  Yorke  in 
Mexico,  at  the  time  when  the  French  army  entered 
the  city  of  Mexico  (1863). 

For  the  sake  of  comparison  with  the  sgraffito 
ware  of  the  Pennsylvania  potters  and  that  made 
by  the  Mexicans  one  mentions  here  several  ex- 
amples of  the  same  ware  made  by  the  Hollanders 
and  a superb  slip-decorated  piece  classed  under  old 
English  pottery  in  the  Museum. 


MEXICAN  MAJOLICA  LAVABO;  ABOUT  1650 
(see  page  255). 


OLD  MEXICAN  BANDEJA. 


/iDexican  /l&ajolica 


261 


The  most  important  of  the  Dutch  pieces  is  a 
plaque,  eighteen  inches  in  diameter,  bearing  the 
central  design  of  a man  plowing,  while  a woman 
looks  on.  The  picture  is  very  quaint.  Two  horses 
are  harnessed  to  the  plow  and  move  forward  with 
the  precision  and  style  of  battle  horses.  The  plow- 
man guides  the  plow  and  holds  in  his  right  hand  a 
club.  The  woman  appears  to  be  offering  a glass 
to  the  man.  Through  the  centre  a huge  tulip  of 
weird  design  grows  merrily  and  above  and  below 
in  the  spaces  available  are  Dutch  inscriptions  with 
the  date  of  the  piece,  1718,  and  the  name  of  Derk 
Rahmeckers,  probably  the  maker. 

The  red  pottery  body  colour  is  covered  with  a 
coating  of  white  slip,  through  which  the  design 
is  engraved.  The  decoration  is  in  yellow,  green 
and  red.  The  piece  is  very  similar  to  an  enormous 
plaque  in  the  Rijks  Museum  at  Amsterdam,  which 
was  made  by  Gerrit  Eevers  at  Schaphuysen,  Hol- 
land, in  the  eighteenth  century. 

The  English  plate,  considered  one  of  the  most 
important  additions  to  the  Museum  collections  in 
many  years,  is  one  of  the  celebrated  “ Toft  ” dishes, 
and  is  conspicuously  signed  with  the  name  of  the 
maker,  Thomas  Toft,  which  occupies  a considerable 
section  of  the  margin.  The  dish  is  eighteen  inches 
in  diameter  and  is  ornamented  in  a bold  and  stri- 
king way.  The  crowned  head  of  Charles  II  of 


262  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  of  fine  arts 


England  is  repeated  five  times  in  the  bowl,  arranged 
in  a sort  of  quatrefoil  pattern,  the  leaves  separated 
by  four  rude  presentments  of  eagles.  In  the  central 
medallion  are  the  initials  R.  C.  one  letter  each  side 
of  the  head,  the  C.  being  reversed.  They  are  sup- 
posed to  stand  for  Rex  Carolus,  and  to  make  the 
identification  of  the  portrait  more  sure,  the  head 
bears  a strong  resemblance  to  the  Charles  II  on  a 
signed  Toft  dish  in  the  Hodgkin  Collection  in  Eng- 
land. 

The  earliest  dated  examples  known  previously  to 
the  discovery  of  this  one  were  made  in  1671,  while 
this  plate  has  been  assigned  to  about  1661,  during 
the  Restoration  in  England. 

The  slip  decoration  is  in  Toft’s  most  character- 
istic style  and  the  colouring  is  orange,  brown  and 
yellow.  The  piece  is  extremely  rare,  and  is  claimed 
as  the  only  specimen  of  its  kind  in  any  public  col- 
lection in  this  country. 


SGRAFFITO  DISH:  DUTCH,  1718. 


SLIP  - DECORATED  DISH  BY  THOMAS  TOFT, 
STAFFORDSHIRE. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 


CHINESE  PORCELAIN  AND  CLOISONNE 

The  Museum’s  collection  of  Chinese  Porcelains 
ranks  with  the  best  of  similar  collections  in  Amer- 
ica. Two  rooms  are  devoted  to  its  disposal.  The 
Bloomfield-Moore  Collection  is  displayed  in  the 
North-East  Pavilion,  while  the  general  collections, 
including  the  bequests  of  Dr.  Francis  W.  Lewis, 
Edward  S.  Clarke  and  Miss  Cornelia  Thompson, 
with  many  rare  pieces  obtained  from  the  Chinese 
Commission  at  the  close  of  the  Centennial  Exhibi- 
tion, occupy  the  South-East  Pavilion. 

The  subject  of  Chinese  porcelain  with  special 
regard  to  the  exhibits  contained  in  the  Museum 
has  been  admirably  covered  in  an  Art  Primer,  No. 
9,  in  the  Ceramic  series,  published  by  the  Museum, 
of  which  Dr.  Barber  is  the  author,  as  well  as  in  a 
contribution  to  the  Bulletin  for  October,  1909,  by 
that  same  authority,  and  these  have  been  exten- 
sively used  in  the  preparation  of  the  following. 

The  Museum  follows  the  method  of  classification 
according  to  the  marking  of  the  porcelains  with  the 
names  of  the  dynasties  and  reigns,  no  more  satis- 


264  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  jfine  Brts 


factory  manner  of  identification  having  as  yet  been 
perfected.  The  classification  of  Chinese  porcelains 
has  always  been  a problem  to  collectors,  owing  to 
the  lack  of  knowledge  of  the  composition  of  the 
various  kinds  of  ware  produced  in  the  early  days 
of  the  Chinese  Empire,  which  precludes  the  possi- 
bility of  grouping  them  according  to  pastes  or 
glazes,  while  the  absence  of  names  or  trade  devices 
of  the  factories  in  the  product  has  made  it  impos- 
sible to  adopt  the  system  of  classification  that 
has  been  used  in  the  study  of  European  porce- 
lains. 

One  of  the  more  familiar  systems  is  that  adopted 
by  Jacquemart,  who  grouped  the  porcelains  accord- 
ing to  their  colour,  or  other  superficial  peculiarities. 
Polychrome  vases  according  to  this  scheme  were 
divided  into  families  such  as  the  familiar  “famille 
verte,”  “famille  rose ” the  chrysanthemopseonian 
family,  etc.,  and  this  method  has  been  generally 
adopted  in  grouping  porcelains  for  exhibition,  is 
constantly  employed  in  sale  catalogues  and  is  often 
referred  to  in  museum  labels. 

The  Museum  possesses  a fine  collection  of  the 
blue  camaieu  and  five-colour  porcelains  of  the  Ming 
Dynasty,  which  date  from  1368  to  1643.  The  early 
reigns  of  the  present  Ch’ing  Dynasty,  particularly 
the  K’ang-hsi,  Yung-cheng,  Ch’ien-lung  and  Chia- 
Ch’ing  (from  1662  to  1820)  are  represented  by 


Chinese  porcelain  anh  Cloisonne  265 


many  remarkable  pieces  including  some  polychrome 
enamelled  vases  and  plaques  and  monochrome 
glazes  of  the  K’ang-hsi  period,  and  a quantity  of 
rose-back  plates  and  enamelled  vases  of  the  Ch’ien- 
lung  reign. 

Amongst  the  noteworthy  pieces  is  a large  globu- 
lar stoneware  vase-shaped  jar  in  the  Bloomfield- 
Moore  Collection,  (’82-329)  belonging  to  the  early 
Ming  Dynasty.  The  jar  is  double,  or  enclosed 
within  a pierced  outer  shell,  upon  which  the  orna- 
ment in  low  relief  is  placed.  This  perforated  back- 
ground is  covered  with  a dark  purplish  and  light 
blue  glaze  while  the  interior  of  the  mouth  is  glazed 
in  green. 

One  of  the  finest  and  most  valuable  pieces  in  the 
collection  is  a fine  example  of  the  famous  Peach- 
Bloom  vases  so  much  desired  by  collectors  of 
Chinese  porcelains.  This  is  in  the  Bloomfield- 
Moore  Collection  and  is  exhibited,  out  of  respect 
to  its  beauty  and  its  rarity,  in  a case  by  itself.  (’82- 

1654) 

This  is  included  among  the  so-called  transmuta- 
tion or  flambe  glazed  porcelains.  The  invention  of 
the  highly  prized  “ peach-blow  ” or  “ peach-bloom  ” 
glaze  (more  aptly  described  by  the  French  " peau  de 
peche”),  has  been  ascribed  to  Ts’ang  Yinghsiiang, 
a member  of  the  Imperial  Commission  which  was 
appointed  in  1680  for  the  porcelain  works  at  Ching- 


266  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  o t fftne  arts 

te-chen,  and  the  name  is  descriptive  of  the  colour 
and  quality  of  the  porcelain. 

The  specimen  in  the  Bloomfield-Moore  collection 
is  chiefly  remarkable  for  its  size.  Vases  of  this 
character  found  in  many  collections  rarely  exceed 
eight  inches  in  height,  while  this  one  measures  fif- 
teen and  three-quarter  inches.  It  is  globular  in 
shape  with  a long  slender  neck,  and  the  colour  of 
the  glaze  is  a dark,  rich  peach  skin  red,  blending 
into  ashes  of  roses,  with  delicate  cloudings  of  apple 
green  and  mottling  of  crushed  strawberry. 

The  colouring  differs  somewhat  from  the  accepted 
theories  on  the  subject,  which  has  led  to  some  hesi- 
tation among  connoisseurs  as  to  its  true  classifica- 
tion, but  this  vase  in  reality  more  nearly  approaches 
the  real  peach  skin  colour  than  the  smaller  vases  in 
other  collections,  which  are  usually  of  a rich  pink 
tone  quite  different  from  the  colour  of  the  fruit 
from  which  the  glaze  derives  its  name.  Examples 
of  the  better  known  type  have  been  sold  in  recent 
years  for  prices  ranging  from  $10,000  to  $18,000. 

“ So-called  transmutation  or  flambe  colours  are 
due  to  the  varied  degrees  of  oxidation  of  copper. 
The  surface  of  the  ware  is  mottled,  flecked,  streaked 
and  splotched  with  various  colours,  ranging  from 
brilliant  reds  through  every  intermediate  shade  of 
purple  to  pale  blue.  Sometimes  all  of  these  colours 
appear  on  a single  piece  while  in  other  cases  different 


PEACH  BLOOM  VASE.  HEXAGONAL  VASE. 

K’ANG-HSI  PERIOD.  ( FAMILLE  VERTE.) 

K’ANG-HSI  PERIOD. 


Chinese  porcelain  anfc  Cloisonne  267 


shades  of  one  or  two  colours  are  used.  True  trans- 
mutation glazes  were  perfected  in  the  Yung-cheng 
reign  (1723-1735)  when  what  had  been  accidental 
effects  were  brought  under  complete  control.  Dur- 
ing the  Ch’ien-lung  period  they  were  developed  to 
the  highest  state  of  perfection.” 

A group  of  Flambe  vases,  Nos.  ’04-777,  ’04-630 
and  ’09-263,  preserved  in  the  Museum,  may  be 
studied  for  purposes  of  comparison.  The  collec- 
tions are  rich  in  monochrome  and  flambe  glazes, 
to  which  three  cases  are  devoted  — two  in  the 
Southeast  Pavilion  and  one  in  the  Bloomfield-Moore 
Collection. 

In  the  reign  of  K’ang-hsi  (1652-1722),  vases 
decorated  with  high  reliefs  of  human  figures  and 
symbolic  objects  were  made.  The  Museum  pre- 
serves a fine  hexagonal  vase  of  this  character,  be- 
longing to  the  so-called  famille  verte.  The  vase 
is  nineteen  inches  high  and  shows  the  “ Immortals 
and  Twin  Merry  Genii  ” in  high  relief. 

In  the  K’ang-hsi  reign,  enamel  colours  reached 
their  greatest  perfection  and  several  new  colours 
were  added  to  the  palette,  such  as  the  brilliant 
greens  noted  in  this  specimen.  A tall  cylindrical 
vase  (’76-1486),  which  was  purchased  from  the 
Chinese  Commission  at  the  Centennial  Exposition, 
is  a splendid  example  also  of  the  famille  verte. 
The  design  in  five-colour  decoration  extends  around 


3$5  ^ntnsflmia  Hci&cf  ef  f\n&  Hrts 


lie  entire  oioiiinniieirenttDe  and  depicts  dre  -^ppr-raf- 
porciHon  muromted  on  a fkmtastk:  targe  drawn  fey 
iriinerons  Ira^d— tpeb  iOffnre.. 

Tike.  Miasenraa  possesses  tbree  specially'  timra*  ex- 
amples ©£  rose-feadk  egg-sled  plates  of  iSn©  Gtaem- 
hmg  Beood  (1736-1795)  icnmnintenEd  *99-688,  rQ2- 
&24  amd  "99-494  respectwdJr-  Tie  first  off  ties© 
fedbmgs  tto  tie  dlass  ©f  plates  wMa  tie  so-called 
secern  borders*  amwfl  cocres  ffratnm  tie  IjoircdniBn  Exposi- 
tojaa  ©ff  1S51-  **  It  is  jwofnieelx  decorated  inn  lariEiaMt 
enamel  coloms  ana d g©M  work.  Im  a large,  wMte* 
sx-pomated^  star-sbaped  reserre  im  tie  centre  is  a 
fegarcrtifmTlllj  paiTTmted  figimre  scene..  A seated  lady 
bolds  a ^iwrtlvpr  fanm  bn  Her  tHtt  Itairod..  By  ber  side 
stands  a lady  attendant,  wMBe  at  tier  feet,  two  boys* 
©me  hnMny  im  Ms  barnd  a giMed  jpa-i  settle;  tie 
©tier  a toy,  ate  pflayimg  life  two  rafebda.  Tbe 
rrmpT  border  ©f  tiiiingnijoase  Mme;  is  diapered  in  black 
Y-ffflUeoL  Tie  next  bonder  is  decorated  witb 
gilded  sttoBhporik.  Tie  ttMrd  border  is  pink  with 
qraatiefoi!  diapering.  Om  tie  ifflat  rinm  is  a broad 
border  coMtalmiiiig  Irregular  imedallioMS  enclosing 
gdderd  ©rnmiBefflifiataQffls  atnd  biitterffines  and  flowers  m 
enamel  cofloctrs  om  a pink  giro»nnmd  of  btxneyeocnb 
diapering.  Tie  edge  is  tipped  wittfe  a marrow  belt 
©f  robim’s  egg  MaeT  TftKjragJhi  It  bas  bent  fee  d5s- 
timet  borders  tie  plate  is  dlassed  with  tie  serea- 
border  series..  Tie  ©tier  two  referred  tou  ora©  ©f 


Chinese  porcelain  anh  Cloisonne  269 


which  is  in  the  Bloomfield-Moore  and  the  other  in 
the  Lewis  Collection,  are  exquisite  examples  of  the 
same  period. 

In  the  Francis  W.  Lewis  collection  is  a large 
octagonal  shaped  temple  censer  which  exemplifies 
the  extensive  use  of  enamel  colours  and  gilding. 
The  Museum  number  of  this  piece  is  ’02-730.  It 
measures  twenty  inches  in  height  and  thirteen  inches 
in  its  greatest  width  and  is  supported  by  eight  low 
cylindrical  feet.  Yellow  is  the  prevailing  colour. 
The  bowl  part  is  decorated  at  the  top  with  a band 
of  sunken  gadroons,  bronzed  and  gilded  and  each 
bordered  with  a heavy  black  enamelled  line  on  a 
green  ground.  This  is  balanced  at  the  bottom  by 
a similar  band  solidly  bronzed  and  slightly  raised. 
The  centre  space  is  ornamented  with  a conventional 
design  in  green  and  red  in  relief  on  a canary  yellow 
ground.  The  whole  of  the  base  or  plinth  is  elabo- 
rately decorated  and  the  cover  or  lid  is  perforated 
bronze,  topped  with  a lion  playing  with  a ball. 

Such  pieces  were  made  for  Siam  and  other  coun- 
tries to  the  south,  the  colour  and  treatment  of  the 
vitrified  enamels  being  strongly  suggestive  of  the 
work  of  the  Siamese  potters. 

The  Museum  contains  a representative  collection 
of  powder  blue,  tea  dust  and  iron  rust  glazes  and  a 
good  series  of  the  white  and  coloured  crackles,  while 
examples  of  rice  grain  decoration  and  white  por- 


270  fl>enns£lt>anta  Hcabem^  of  jfine  Brts 

celain  of  various  pastes  and  glazes  form  an  inter- 
esting group.  One  of  the  most  effective  cases  in  the 
general  collection  contains  a group  of  yellow  and 
green  glazes  of  the  K’ang-hsi  and  Ch’ien-lung 
periods  and  includes  six  large  vases  with  dark  yel- 
low ground  decorated,  in  raised  enamel  colours, 
with  grotesque  lions. 

By  far  the  largest  division  of  Chinese  porcelains 
is  that  which  includes  the  several  varieties  of  painted 
wares.  In  these  the  colour  was  applied  in  three 
different  ways  — by  the  under  glaze  method,  where 
the  raw  clay  was  decorated  and  then  fired;  by  the 
application  of  colour  to  the  biscuit  or  baked  clay 
before  glazing  and  by  an  enamel  process,  where  the 
colour  is  added  to  the  glazed  surface  and  fixed  at  a 
low  temperature  in  what  is  called  a muffle  stove. 
The  technical  names  for  these  three  methods  of 
colouring  are,  Grand  Feu , Demi-Grand  Feu  and 
Moufde. 

The  earliest  underglaze  colour  used  by  the  Chi- 
nese potters  was  cobalt  blue.  In  the  Chia-ching 
period  of  the  Ming  Dynasty  (1522-1566)  a dark, 
rich,  purplish  blue,  almost  black,  was  employed  to 
decorate  the  white  glaze.  It  was  known  as  Moham- 
medan or  Mussulman  blue  and  its  use  extended  to 
the  Wan-li  reign  (1573-1619).  Several  fine  ex- 
amples decorated  in  this  colour  are  preserved  in 
the  Bloomfield-Moore  Collection.  One  of  them  is 


TEMPLE  CENSER,  DECORATED  IN  ENAMEL  LARGE  QUADRANGULAR  VASE.  CLOISONNE 


Chinese  porcelain  anh  Cloisonne  271 


a double  gourd-shaped  vase  about  twenty  inches  in 
height,  with  circular  medallions  enclosing  five- 
clawed  dragon  and  phoenix  motives.  The  irregular 
form,  and  archaic  style  of  the  painting  and  the 
colour  place  the  vase  as  of  the  Wan-li  period  (’82- 
727). 

A second  piece  of  the  same  epoch  is  in  the  same 
collection  and  worthy  of  special  attention.  This  is 
a large  ovoid,  eight-sided  vase  of  opaque  stoneware, 
with  figures  representing  the  eight  Taoist  Immor- 
tals in  the  same  deep  blue  (’82-325). 

The  Lewis  bequest  includes  a large  collection  of 
Japanese  and  Chinese  cloisonne  enamels  gathered 
together  by  Dr.  Lewis  and  presented  in  its  entirety 
by  Miss  Mary  Lewis,  his  sister.  The  collection 
covers  the  manufacture  of  this  product  from  the 
fifteenth  century  down  to  a comparatively  recent 
period.  One  of  the  finest  examples  is  a large  quad- 
rangular vase  nearly  two  feet  in  height  supported  by 
eight  vertical  dentated  ribs  in  bronze.  All  the  visi- 
ble portions  of  this  vase  are  heavily  incrusted  with 
cloisonne  enamels  in  rich  colours,  of  which  the  pre- 
dominating are  lapis-lazuli  blue,  dark  coral,  yellow, 
green  and  clouded  white  on  a medium  blue  ground. 
The  piece  is  ascribed  to  the  Ching  T’ai  reign  of  the 
Ming  Dynasty  (1450-1456).  It  is  mounted  on  a 
square  teakwood  base  carved  to  harmonize  with  the 
decorative  motive  of  the  vase. 


CHAPTER  XIX 


CLASSIC  POTTERY,  SWISS  GLASS,  LACES,  FURNITURE 

The  collections  of  classical  antiquities  include  the 
William  Hammer,  Francis  W.  Lewis,  William  S. 
Vaux  and  Robert  H.  Lamborn  collections  and  con- 
tain representative  series  of  pottery,  minor  marbles, 
bronzes  and  glass.  There  is  a rich  collection  of 
antique  lamps,  a group  of  black  Etruscan  pottery, 
known  as  Bucchero  ware,  and  a case  of  Cypriote 
and  Corinthian  pottery  which  contains  several  fine 
examples  of  red-figured  pottery. 

Three  groups  of  Greek  and  Italian  vases,  known 
as  the  Vaux,  Lamborn  and  Lewis  collections,  in- 
clude about  seven  hundred  examples  mostly  pur- 
chased in  Italy.  One  of  the  oldest  pieces  in  the 
collection  is  the  Cypriote  cup  with  two  handles  and 
decorated  with  droll  representations  of  birds  which 
is  assigned  to  a period  immediately  following  the 
Mycenaean  epoch.  Of  later  Cypriote  vases,  manu- 
factured during  the  Graeco-Phoenician  period  (800- 
400  b.  c.),  the  collection  contains  many  good  ex- 
amples. 

Bucchero  ware,  the  native  pottery  of  the  Etrus- 
272 


ATTIC  STAMNOS,  520-500  b.  c.  RED  FIGURED  STYLE.  ASKOS  FROM  CANOSA,  3RD  CENTURY,  B.  C. 

HERAKLES  STRUGGLING  WITH  THE  NEMEAN  LION. 


Classic  ©otters 


273 


cans,  is  well  represented  by  the  typical  wine  jugs 
and  drinking  cups  and  some  exquisitely  shaped 
vases,  the  clay  of  which  is  as  thin  as  that  of  the 
lightest  modern  tea-cup.  The  collection  contains 
also  a number  of  fine  specimens  of  Attic  vases  in 
the  black-figured  style,  mostly  amphorae  or  two- 
handled  jars.  Of  these  the  most  valuable  piece  in 
the  collection  is  the  red-figured  Attic  stamnos  which 
comes  from  the  collection  of  Joseph  Bonaparte.  It 
is  a typical  example  of  520-500  b.  c.,  when  the  style 
of  vase  painting  was  simple  and  severe.  Herakles’ 
struggle  with  the  Nemean  lion  is  the  subject  of  the 
decoration  on  one  side  of  the  jar  while  the  other 
side  depicts  the  struggle  of  Theseus  with  the  Mara- 
thonian  bull.  A curious  feature  of  this  piece  is  an 
inscription  which  is  written  backward  above  the 
groups  of  figures  and  which  has  been  translated  to 
read,  “ You  are  beautiful.”  The  habit  of  inscribing 
Greek  vases  is  a well  known  one  but  this  inscription 
is  rare  and  adds  to  the  value  of  the  jar. 

A large  proportion  of  the  collection  is  made  up 
of  Apulian  vases  of  the  fourth  and  third  cen- 
turies b.  c.,  and  the  later  Apulian  style  is  also  well 
represented. 

In  the  Vaux  collection  of  pottery  there  is  a fine 
vase  of  red  clay  covered  with  white  slip  from 
Canosa,  Southern  Italy,  of  so  ornate  a type  that  it 
vies  with  the  artistic  terra  cottas  of  the  Hellenistic 


274  Pennsylvania  Bca&enty  o i jftne  Brts 


period.  The  vase  belongs  to  the  “ askos  ” order 
and  is  twenty- three  inches  in  height  and  fourteen 
and  one-eighth  in  width.  The  period  is  the  third 
century  b.  c. 

“ The  askos  proper  as  a ceramic  form  is  first  seen 
during  the  red-figure  vase  period.  The  semi-globu- 
lar body  is  flat  at  the  bottom  and  convex  at  the  top 
with  a handle  sometimes  arched  over  the  top  to 
meet  the  spout,  sometimes,  especially  in  Southern 
Italy,  resembling  a wine  skin  or  pouch-like  appear- 
ance. This  species  of  vase  is  usually  classed  among 
the  oil  vases  or  lamp  feeders.  The  great  vases  of 
which  the  Museum  example  is  a typical  specimen, 
however,  must  have  been  purely  ornamental.  Not 
only  was  their  elaborate  and  fragile  ornamentation 
unsuited  to  even  careful  use,  but  some  are  found 
to  be  virtually  imitation  vases,  with  false  bottoms 
and  closed  spouts.  They  are  usually  of  very  large 
size,  some  are  truly  gigantic,  and  it  is  likely  that  like 
other  large  vases  of  Apulia,  i.  e.,  kraters  and  am- 
phorae, they  were  made  for  sepulchral  uses.  They 
occupy  a place  midway  between  the  terra  cotta  figu- 
rine and  the  vase.  . . . 

“ Like  the  statuettes  of  the  period,  the  clay  is  cov- 
ered over  entirely  with  a white  slip  laid  directly  on 
the  unglazed  red  clay.  The  figurines  and  heads  are 
usually  coloured,  as  were  the  statuettes  of  the  time 
and  show  pink  and  blue  draperies.  . . . On  the 


Classic  ©otters 


275 


front  of  this  vase,  under  the  wide  spout,  a bold  relief 
of  a fine  Medusa  mask  is  appliqued.  A small  one  is 
also  applied  on  the  back  of  the  vase.  On  either  side 
of  the  front  mask  . . . the  head  and  forepart  of  a 
horse  springs  forward  as  it  were  out  of  the  body  of 
the  vase.  These  horses’  manes  are  tied  up  in  a knot, 
standing  straight  up  in  front  above  their  heads, 
which  gives  them  a unicorn-like  appearance.  A tall, 
winged  figure  stands  gracefully  on  the  handle  of  the 
askos.  Two  smaller  ones  stand  over  the  covered 
spouts.  All  three  are  draped  and  lean  upon  a sup- 
port.” 1 

These  askoi  are  found  at  Calvi,  Canosa,  Cumae 
and  such  places  in  Southern  Italy  and  the  Apulian 
region. 


Swiss  Glass 

One  of  the  most  interesting  and  original  of  the 
collections  of  the  Pennsylvania  Museum  is  a group 
of  thirty-seven  pieces  of  stained  glass,  mostly  of 
Swiss  origin,  unique  in  this  country.  It  is  of  the 
type  known  as  domestic  glass,  which  was  used  in 
olden  times  to  decorate  the  windows  in  the  homes 
of  the  wealthy  burghers  or  their  council  halls.  Such 
glass  is  not  to  be  obtained  to-day,  all  the  pieces  of 
value  being  held  by  a few  of  the  great  museums  or 

1 “ Askos  from  Canosa.”  By  Mrs.  Cornelius  Stevenson.  Bulletin 
of  the  Pennsylvania  Museum.  July,  1910. 


276  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


in  private  collections.  The  Museum’s  collection  was 
amassed  by  a former  trustee  of  the  institution,  Dr. 
Francis  W.  Lewis,  who  picked  it  up  piece  by  piece, 
some  thirty-five  years  ago,  and  contains  some  ex- 
amples from  the  well  known  collection  of  Dr.  Ferdi- 
nand Keller  of  Zurich.  It  came  to  the  Museum 
through  Dr.  Lewis’  sister,  Miss  Mary  Lewis. 

An  interesting  discussion  of  the  subject  is  con- 
tained in  two  articles,  written  by  Mr.  Charles  E. 
Dana,  which  appeared  in  the  July  and  October 
numbers  of  the  Bulletin  of  the  Pennsylvania  Mu- 
seum, for  1907.  From  these  the  following  is 
quoted : 

“ The  small  scale  of  the  dwelling  room  or  even 
of  the  Swiss  council  chamber  in  the  olden  days  de- 
manded a more  delicate  treatment  of  its  stained 
glass  than  the  huge  lights  of  a cathedral,  dimly  seen 
from  afar.  The  specimens  of  the  glazier’s  art  we 
are  studying  were  set  either  in  bands  across  the  win- 
dows, or  else  formed  a central  panel  therein.  How- 
ever placed  they  were  so  near  the  observer  that  they 
could  be  examined  in  detail.  It  seems  to  have  been 
the  custom  of  town  councils  and  trade  guilds  to 
present  to  neighbouring  councils  or  guilds  these 
glass  panels  in  the  production  of  which  the  local 
glass  painter  was  put  upon  his  mettle  and,  as  we  see, 
proved  himself  well  worthy  of  the  trust  the  fathers 
of  the  borough  placed  in  him.  The  rooms  were 


Classic  pottery 


277 


often  large  but  gloomy  on  account  of  the  low  ceiling 
and  small  windows.  The  Renaissance  artist  there- 
fore wanted  to  shut  out  as  little  light  as  possible,  so 
he  employed  not  only  translucent  but  transparent 
glass.  . . . 

“ One  great  charm  of  the  Swiss  glass  is  that  in 
figure  or  heraldic  work  we  get  that  delightful  unex- 
pectedness, that  deviation  from  conventional  com- 
position which  gives  such  a charm  to  anything  we 
are  to  live  with  and  constantly  look  up  to  for  pleas- 
ure and  rest.  The  usual  form  of  design  consisted  of 
a sort  of  florid  canopy  frame  of  moderate  dimen- 
sions enclosing  one,  two  or  three  shields  of  arms, 
supported  by  fantastically  dressed  men  at  arms. 
. . . The  Swiss,  republican  though  they  be,  have 
always  taken  great  pride  in  their  ancestry  and  con- 
sequently in  their  armorial  bearings. 

“ In  the  windows  of  a private  house  it  was  the 
master  and  mistress  who  supported  the  armorial 
shield,  both  in  their  Sunday  best,  and  very  proud 
of  themselves,  too.  Do  not  overlook  the  quaint 
little  Bible  subjects,  mainly  in  grisaille.  There  are 
in  one  of  the  finest  of  our  glasses,  a domestic  one, 
two  delightful  little  pictures  of  the  Ark.  Dr.  Lewis 
suggests  that  the  pictures  were  intended  to  typify 
the  antiquity  of  the  family,  as  did  the  celebrated 
Welsh  one,  where  one  of  the  sons  of  Noah  is  repre- 
sented carrying,  evidently  with  great  care  and  a 


278  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  of  fftne  Brts 


feeling  of  deep  responsibility,  the  records  of  the 
same  Welsh  family.” 

The  best  period  of  the  industry  was  from  about 
I53°  to  a little  later  than  1600  and  this  epoch  is 
well  illustrated  in  the  collection  at  the  Museum. 
One  of  the  finest  pieces  is  a Swiss  Heraldic  speci- 
men dated  1603,  which  was  one  of  Dr.  Ferdinand 
Keller’s  collection.  In  it  are  shown  the  Municipal 
arms  with  gryphons  as  supporters.  The  arms  are 
cut  with  the  wheel  — which  was  characteristic  of 
the  best  period  — from  ruby  glass  and  then 
diapered  on  the  face.  The  Swiss  cross  appears 
in  the  chief  or  upper  part  of  the  flag  borne  by  the 
truculent  standard  bearer.  The  artist’s  initials, 
W.  B.,  are  signed  after  the  date. 

Many  of  the  finer  windows  were  designed  by 
artists  of  great  repute.  Tobias  Stimmer  and  even 
Holbein  made  drawings  for  such  purposes,  if  they 
did  not  work  actually  upon  the  glass.  Holbein’s 
famous  “ Stations  of  the  Cross,”  preserved  at  Bale, 
are  in  fact  cartoons  for  windows.  They  have  all 
the  precision  and  crispness  of  etchings. 

Our  second  illustration  is  of  an  earlier  period. 
It  is  an  example  of  Swiss  domestic  glass,  one  of  a 
pair,  and  is  dated  1584.  The  inscription  reads: 
“ Eufrosina  vo(n)  Freysing  Geborne  Hagin  sein 
seliche  Hausfrau.”  (Eufrosina  Freysing,  born 
Hagin,  his  happy  wife.) 


SWISS  HERALDIC  GLASS,  1603.  SWISS  DOMESTIC  GLASS,  1584. 


Classic  Jpotterg 


279 


Laces 

The  Museum  possesses  a rich  and  interesting 
collection  of  old  laces,  of  particular  value  to  the 
student  owing  to  the  logical  arrangement  and  the 
historical  completeness  of  the  series.  These  are 
partly  displayed  in  the  West  Arcade  and  partly  in 
the  East  Corridor. 

The  general  collection  in  the  West  Arcade  in- 
cludes textiles,  laces,  embroideries  and  costumes. 
A collection  formed  to  illustrate  the  manufacture 
and  history  of  point  and  pillow  lace  fills  several 
cases  and  an  interesting  section  is  an  instructive 
exhibit  of  materials  illustrating  the  method  of 
making  old  galloons,  laces  and  fringes  of  gold, 
silver  and  silk,  the  gift  of  the  German  Commis- 
sioners at  the  Centennial  Exposition.  In  another 
case  may  be  seen  a collection  of  such  trimmings, 
including  Italian  specimens  of  the  fifteenth  and 
sixteenth  centuries,  and  French  examples  covering 
the  period  from  the  early  part  of  the  seventeenth 
to  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  centuries. 

Special  attention  is  directed  to  an  altar  cloth  of 
Punto  a Maglia,  or  darned  netting,  with  designs 
illustrating  scriptural  subjects,  such  as  the  Cruci- 
fixion, the  sacrifice  of  Isaac,  etc.  This  piece  is  the 
gift  of  Mrs.  John  Harrison,  the  Honorary  Cura- 
tor of  the  Department. 

Extending  the  length  of  the  north  wall  is  a fac- 


280  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  of  jfine  Hrts 

simile  of  the  famous  Bayeux  Tapestry,  made  by  an 
autotype  process  and  coloured  by  hand,  showing 
the  most  minute  details  of  the  original  fabric  pre- 
served at  Bayeux,  France. 

In  the  Bloomfield-Moore  collection  is  a second 
superb  and  effective  example  of  “ Punto  a Maglia  ” 
popularly  known  as  filet  brode,  the  art  of  which 
has  recently  been  revived  in  France.  In  this  piece 
the  filet  is  combined  with  the  reverse  process  known 
as  “Punto  Tagliato,”  or  cut  work,  in  alternating 
squares.  The  cover  really  illustrates  four  kinds 
of  needlework.  One  alternate  set  of  squares  is 
composed  of  Punto  d Maglia,  the  other  of  linen 
bordered  by  drawn  thread  work  and  in  the  centre 
of  each  linen  square  one  finds  the  Punto  Tagliato 
and  the  Reticella,  a style  made  from  a linen 
foundation,  partly  by  buttonhole  stitch. 

One  of  the  features  of  the  collection  is  a superb 
garniture  of  old  Point  de  Venise,  the  gift  of  the 
late  Mrs.  Owen  Wister.  This  is  the  “ gros  point 
de  Venise  ” of  the  late  seventeenth  century. 

Furniture 

The  Museum  conserves  a valuable  collection  of 
furniture  which  has  recently  been  reinstalled  in  a 
series  of  rooms  dedicated  to  its  use,  and  carefully 
fitted  up  to  correspond  to  the  nature  and  period 


LACE  COVER  ILLUSTRATING  PUNTO  A MAGLIA  OR  DARNED  NETTING. 


Classic  potten? 


281 


of  the  exhibits  shown.  The  oldest  group  is  six- 
teenth century  Spanish,  which  is  placed  in  a room 
whose  walls  are  covered  with  old  Flemish  leather 
of  Spanish  inspiration,  and  the  ceiling  decorated 
after  designs  taken  from  a Spanish  house. 

An  early  seventeenth  century  room  has  been 
fitted  with  English  oak  in  the  style  of  Haddon 
Hall,  with  wooden  ceiling  and  panelling.  In  this 
room  is  a double  cabinet  of  English  oak,  in  which 
the  date,  1700,  is  carved  in  the  centre  of  the  upper 
overhanging  rail,  in  combination  with  the  letters 
I.  W.  M.  The  entire  front  is  elaborately  carved 
in  scrolled  and  foliated  patterns,  characteristic  of 
the  period. 

A beautifully  carved  and  gilded  mirror  set,  in  the 
style  of  the  Adam  Brothers,  English  furniture 
makers  of  the  late  eighteenth  century,  is  one  of 
the  most  recent  acquisitions,  and  has  been  hung 
over  the  Adam  mantel  in  the  English  eighteenth 
century  alcove.  This  set  includes  a long  central 
mirror  and  side  sconces  of  remarkably  delicate 
design. 

A carved  oak  cabinet  of  the  seventeenth  century 
is  one  of  the  fine  pieces  in  the  English  style  but  of 
Dutch  manufacture. 


CHAPTER  XX 


GENERAL  COLLECTIONS 

To  the  east  of  the  Rotunda  is  the  large  apartment 
known  as  the  East  Gallery  where  are  installed  the 
general  collections  of  ceramics,  glassware,  jewelry, 
silver,  enamels,  lacquers,  ivories,  wood  carvings 
and  musical  instruments. 

The  general  collections  of  pottery  and  porcelain 
are  exhibited  in  this  apartment.  The  exhibits  in- 
clude cases  of  Persian  pottery,  tin  enamelled  wares, 
salt  glazed  stoneware,  lustre  and  cream  wares,  lead- 
glazed  pottery,  tortoise  shell  wares,  etc.  The  won- 
derful collection  of  Pennsylvania  Pottery  has 
recently  been  installed  there,  and  the  rare  collection 
of  Mexican  Majolica  forms  one  of  its  attractive 
features. 

One  of  the  interesting  collections  is  that  of 
Anglo-American  pottery,  bearing  views  of  old 
historic  American  buildings  and  portraits  of 
American  statesmen,  which  was  produced  by 
Liverpool  and  Staffordshire  potters  from  about 
1790  to  1S30.  Many  are  decorated  with  views 
of  Philadelphia,  and  are  interesting  evidence  of 

282 


General  Collections 


283 


the  physical  aspect  of  the  city  in  the  early  days 
of  the  Republic. 

Among  these  general  collections  are  several  small 
groups  of  surpassing  interest  to  connoisseurs. 
Chief  of  these  is  a group  of  thirteen  pieces  of 
genuine  Lowestoft  China,  some  of  which  were 
found  on  the  site  of  the  old  factory  in  the  town  of 
Lowestoft  at  the  easternmost  point  of  England. 

Until  recently  but  little  was  known  about  true 
Lowestoft  china.  The  controversy  as  to  its  origin 
has  been  made  the  subject  of  so  many  articles  and 
papers  that  it  is  superfluous  for  one  to  do  more 
than  mention  it  in  a work  of  this  kind.  The  point 
that  the  china  found  in  America  which  has  gone 
under  the  name  of  Lowestoft  is  in  reality  of  Chi- 
nese manufacture,  both  as  to  paste  and  decoration, 
has  presumably  been  settled. 

The  claim  that  the  china  was  made  in  China  and 
sent  to  England  to  be  decorated  still  occupies  prom- 
inent authorities.  An  English  authority  upon  the 
subject,  Mr.  Owen,  in  his  “ Two  Centuries  of 
Ceramic  Art  in  Bristol,”  says : “ There  cannot  be 
any  doubt  that  hard  porcelain,  vitrified  and  trans- 
lucent, was  never  manufactured  from  the  raw  mate- 
rials, native  kaolin  and  petunse,  at  any  other  local- 
ity in  England  than  Plymouth  and  Bristol.  The 
tradition  that  such  ware  was  made  at  Lowestoft  in 
1775  . . . rests  upon  evidence  too  slight  to  be 


284  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  tftne  Brts 


worthy  of  argument.  The  East  India  Company 
imported  into  England  large  quantities  of  por- 
celain for  sale.  . . . This  particular  ware,  which  is 
very  plentiful  even  at  the  present  day,  and  which 
has  of  late  acquired  the  reputation  of  having  been 
made  at  Lowestoft,  was  simply  in  form  and  orna- 
mentation a reproduction  by  the  Chinese  of  Eng- 
lish earthenware  models.  The  Chinese  do  not  use 
saucers,  butter  boats  and  numbers  of  other  articles 
after  the  European  fashion  and  the  agents  in  China 
were  compelled  to  furnish  a model  for  every  piece 
of  ware  ordered.  These  models  the  Asiatic  work- 
men have  copied  only  too  faithfully.  The  ill  drawn 
roses,  the  coarsely  painted  baskets  of  flowers,  the 
rude  borders  of  lines  and  dots  are  literally  copied 
from  the  inartistic  painting  of  the  English  earthen- 
ware of  by-gone  days. 

“ There  is  a tradition  that  Oriental  ware  was 
imported  in  the  white  state,  to  be  painted  in  Eng- 
land. Before  giving  belief  to  this  speculation  it  will 
be  necessary  to  consider  how  singular,  nay,  impos- 
sible, a circumstance  it  is,  that  if  this  unpainted 
china  was  imported  in  quantities  sufficient  to  con- 
stitute a trade,  none  of  it  should  have  escaped  into 
private  custody  free  from  that  miserable  deface- 
ment which  has  been  called  decoration. ” 

In  1902  a remarkable  discovery  was  made  on  the 
site  of  the  original  china  factory  at  Lowestoft,  Eng- 


General  Collections 


285 


land.  This  was  the  uncovering  of  pottery  moulds 
and  a large  quantity  of  bits  of  china,  in  all  stages 
of  manufacture,  by  means  of  which  the  real  char- 
acter of  the  paste,  the  style  of  decoration  and  the 
shapes  of  the  ware,  manufactured  in  the  town  of 
Lowestoft,  became  for  the  first  time  known.  From 
these  bits  of  circumstantial  evidence  it  has  been 
established  that  at  least  three  kinds  of  china  were 
made  at  Lowestoft. 

The  first  imitated  the  Worcester  porcelain  and 
was  made  in  a whitish  paste,  decorated  in  blue,  of 
which  the  glaze  is  tinged  with  blue.  This  variety 
is  represented  in  the  Museum  by  two  cups,  one 
decorated  in  a poor  copy  of  the  Worcester  “ pow- 
der blue  ” and  the  other  with  a blue  transfer-printed 
pagoda  design  of  distinct  Worcester  inspiration. 
The  second,  more  characteristic  variety,  is  a deep 
cream  ware  decorated  in  enamel  in  Chinese  designs. 
The  Worcester  porcelain  of  the  period  was  also 
imitated  in  this  variety.  The  third  is  of  a peculiar 
tint  resembling  a duck’s  egg  and,  by  comparison 
with  the  cream  ware,  is  of  a greenish  hue.  Chinese 
designs  and  colours  were  copied  in  this  style,  which 
seems  to  have  been  made  in  imitation  of  the  Chinese 
so-called  Lowestoft.  Of  this  last,  the  Museum  has 
to  show  a small  jug. 

The  collection  is  interesting  for  several  reasons. 
In  the  first  place  the  pieces  here  shown  constitute 


286  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


the  only  ones,  with  a few  exceptions,  in  this  coun- 
try, but  the  most  important  point  in  the  discovery 
of  the  true  Lowestoft  is  covered  by  Dr.  Barber  in 
an  article  on  the  false  product,  in  the  Museum  Bul- 
letin for  October,  1905.  He  says : 

“ The  recent  discovery  of  pottery  moulds  and 
fragments  of  pottery  and  soft  paste,  on  the  site  of 
an  unimportant  factory  at  Lowestoft,  England,  has 
demonstrated  beyond  question,  that  the  hard  paste 
ware  which  has  for  a generation  been  known  to 
collectors  as  4 Lowestoft  ’ was  never  produced  in 
England,  but  was  of  Oriental  manufacture.  ...  It 
may  be  safely  assumed  that  every  piece  of  hard 
paste  ware  in  this  country  which  has  been  supposed 
to  be  Lowestoft,  is  of  Chinese  workmanship, 
brought  here  by  sailing  vessels  or  by  the  East  India 
Company,  while  those  pieces  of  soft  paste  porcelain 
and  white  pottery  resembling  the  so-called  Lowes- 
toft style  in  decoration,  are  merely  examples  of  that 
numerous  class  of  ware  which  was  produced  at  a 
score  or  more  English  potteries  a hundred  years  or 
so  ago,  but  which  in  reality  bear  little  resemblance 
to  the  real  products  of  the  insignificant  Lowestoft 
factory,  which  was  closed  in  1804.” 

Three  exquisite  vases  from  the  Minton  factory 
are  among  the  fine  things  in  the  general  collections 
of  pottery  preserved  by  the  Museum,  and  were 
decorated  by  the  celebrated  artist  Mr.  M.  L.  Solon. 


(Benerai  Collections 


287 


Of  these  the  chef  d’ oeuvre  is  the  large  vase  in  the 
Temple  collection  of  which  the  subject  is  “ The 
Merry  Jester  ” and  the  number  ’98-95.  The  style 
of  treatment  is  the  pcite-sur-pate,  which  is  to  say 
that  the  effect  is  gained  by  building  one  liquid  white 
paste  upon  another  until  the  desired  tone  is  ob- 
tained. On  one  side  of  the  vase,  the  body  of  which 
is  of  a handsome  red,  a nymph  in  the  guise  of  a 
court  jester,  is  depicted  talking  to  her  bauble,  and 
on  the  reverse  side  is  a puppet  show,  in  which  little 
wooden  actors  are  giving  a performance  of 
“ Minerva,  Goddess  of  Wisdom,  overcome  and 
vanquished  by  Love.”  The  ensemble  is  indescri- 
bably lovely  and  graceful  both  as  to  shape  and  deco- 
ration. 

The  artist,  Mr.  Solon,  is  a Frenchman,  once  con- 
nected with  the  manufactory  at  Sevres.  In  1870  he 
went  to  England  and  became  associated  with  the 
Minton  factory  at  Stoke-on-Trent.  Here  he  deco- 
rated a large  number  of  pieces  in  his  wonderful 
style  without  duplicating  any  of  his  subjects. 

The  Museum  preserves  a little  group  of  five 
pieces  of  genuine  Capo  di  Monte,  which  is  now 
so  exceedingly  rare  that  few  examples  are  to  be 
found  in  European  museums  outside  of  Italy,  while 
in  the  United  States  they  are  said  to  be  practically 
unknown.  For  purposes  of  instructive  study  the 
curator  has  placed  these  rare  pieces  in  juxtaposition 


288  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  ot  fftne  Brts 


to  some  of  the  current  forgeries  of  the  ware  which 
are  rife  enough.  The  genuine  has  a quality  which 
speaks  for  itself,  the  superb  modelling  of  the  fig- 
ures, the  beauty  of  the  colour  and  the  character  of 
the  gold,  being  sufficient  evidence  of  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  specimens. 

The  pieces  in  the  possession  of  the  Museum  in- 
clude a cup  and  saucer  with  relief  designs  repre- 
senting on  one  side  the  “ Triumph  of  Bacchus  ” and 
on  the  other  “ Ceres  in  her  Chariot.”  These  are 
from  the  collection  of  Rev.  T.  Staniforth,  who 
secured  them  at  the  celebrated  sale  of  the  Bernal 
collection  in  1855.  A seau,  or  ice  pail,  with  figure 
decoration  in  high  relief,  with  a representation  of 
Apollo  and  Daphne,  and  whose  handles  are  in  the 
form  of  hooded  dolphins,  is  a particularly  virile 
example,  characteristic  of  the  best  period  of  the 
Capo  di  Monte  factory  when  hard  paste  was  manu- 
factured, from  about  1759  to  1800. 

The  most  notable  piece  in  the  little  collection  is 
a hard  paste  porcelain  tea-pot  decorated  in  relief 
with  a mythological  group  on  one  side  and  on  the 
other  the  “ Judgment  of  Paris.”  The  exhibit 
comes  from  the  recent  Hoe  sale,  where  it  was  in- 
correctly labelled  “ Chelsea,”  under  which  appella- 
tion it  rested  in  obscurity  until  discovered  by  Dr. 
Barber,  who  bid  it  in. 

One  of  the  most  recent  of  the  acquisitions  to  the 


CARVED  GLASS  VASE,  EMILE  GALLE  CAPO  DI  MONTE  SEAU,  OR  ICE  PAIL,  1760-1800. 

(see  page  248). 


General  Collections 


289 


Museum  collection  is  an  old  Raeren  flagon,  or  salt 
glazed  stoneware  jug,  worthy  of  special  attention 
on  account  of  its  history.  It  is  of  the  brown  and 
grey  glaze  which  characterized  the  productions  of 
Raeren,  near  Aix-la-Chapelle  in  the  province  of 
Limburg,  the  original  seat  of  the  stoneware  indus- 
try in  Flanders,  ’in  the  latter  half  of  the  sixteenth 
century  and  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth.  This 
fine  example  measures  nearly  eighteen  inches  in 
height  and  is  dated  1609,  which  has  created  the 
impression  that  it  was  made  to  commemorate  the 
treaty  of  peace  between  Spain  and  the  Netherlands. 
About  the  centre  of  the  jug  are  seven  arched  al- 
coves containing  the  effigies  of  kings  and  prominent 
persons  in  relief.  These  are  half-lengths  which  pre- 
side over  their  coats  of  arms,  while  above  are  in- 
scribed their  names.  The  first  niche  on  the  left  is 
labelled  “ Marquis  Spinola,”  having  reference  to  the 
Italian  Marquis  Ambrogio  di  Spinola,  who  was  born 
in  1570  and  was  the  opponent  of  Johann  Mauritz, 
Count  of  Nassau,  in  the  Netherlands  before  the 
declaration  of  peace. 

The  second  alcove  is  entitled  “ Engels  Konig,” 
King  of  England.  The  third  is  inscribed  “ Roeimsch 
Kaiser,”  Emperor  of  Rome  or  the  Holy  Roman 
Empire.  Next  to  this  is  “ Spans  Konig,”  King  of 
Spain,  and  following  these  are  “ Konig  in  Franc- 
rig,”  King  of  France,  and  “ Konig  in  Denmarc,” 


290  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


King  of  Denmark.  The  inscription  over  the  seventh 
figure  is  obliterated.  Similar  examples  are  to  be 
found  in  the  museums  of  Cologne  and  Aachen,  in 
which  the  last  medallion  is  inscribed  “ Mauritis,” 
with  the  arms  of  Nassau  beneath. 

In  the  niche  occupied  by  the  Roman  Emperor  the 
word  “ Pais  ” occurs  for  which  reason  this  com- 
memorative pattern  is  known  as  the  Peace  Jug.  In 
two  of  the  other  divisions  are  the  letters  “ H.  B.” 
and  “ I.  B.”  which  are  presumed  to  be  the  marks 
of  Jan  Baldems  and  the  workman  who  assisted  him 
in  making  the  forms.  This  master  potter  belonged 
to  a line  of  celebrated  artists  and  modellers,  of  whom 
his  predecessors  Baldem  Mennicken  and  Jan  Emens 
were  the  most  noted.  These  Peace  Jugs  were  ex- 
tremely popular  and  distinguished  men  even  at  dis- 
tant points  ordered  examples  from  the  pottery  at 
Raeren  and  had  them  decorated  with  their  coats 
of  arms. 

On  the  back  of  this  jug  are  three  coats  of  arms 
in  medallions.  The  central  one  has  not  yet  been 
identified  but  the  other  two  are  inscribed  “ F.  Joan 
Mintzenburg  Prior  Carmel  Franc.  1609.”  Johan 
Mintzenburg  was  at  that  time  a Carmelite  Prior  at 
Frankfort,  Germany,  and  this  example  was  prob- 
ably made  for  him. 

The  Museum  possesses  a rare  example  of  a so- 
called  Saracenic  tin-enamelled  and  lustre  tile  from 


SARACENIC  TIN  - ENAMELLED  AND  LUSTRE  TILE 
FROM  NORTHWESTERN  PERSIA,  13TH  CENTURY. 


LARGE  PERSIAN  PLAQUE,  17TH  CENTURY. 


General  Collections 


291 


north-western  Persia,  ascribed  to  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury. It  is  in  the  form  of  an  eight-pointed  star  and 
measures  twelve  and  a half  inches  in  diameter.  The 
colouring  is  most  exquisite,  being  something  be- 
tween purple  and  brown  with  a golden  lustre.  The 
pattern  consists  of  two  conventionalized  human  fig- 
ures, with  broad  faces  of  the  Mongolian  type,  the 
one  to  the  right  wearing  a tiara  or  sorgoudg,  the 
insignia  of  sovereignty,  which  would  seem  to  indi- 
cate a royal  personage.  The  inscription  has  not  as 
yet  been  translated,  but  it  appears  to  be  in  Persian 
and  has  been  thought  to  be  part  of  a love  poem.  It 
extends  entirely  around  the  pointed  margin.  Dr. 
Barber  in  writing  of  the  tile  places  it  as  “ a repre- 
sentative example  of  the  Arab-Mongolian  type.  It 
is  Perso-Islamic  rather  than  pure  Iranian.  The 
white  stanniferous  enamel  is  thick  and  heavy.  The 
superimposed  lustre  is  identical  with  that  which  is 
found  on  some  of  the  Hispano-Moresco  plaques. 
It  is  of  brownish  yellow  tone,  but  when  viewed  at 
an  angle  it  changes  to  a bluish-violet,  of  the  same 
quality  as  that  of  the  madreperla  lustres  of  Valencia, 
which  were  introduced  later  into  Italy  by  the  Moors. 
We  are  therefore  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  these 
star-shaped  tiles  were  made  under  Saracenic  influ- 
ence modified  to  some  extent  by  the  introduction  of 
Mongolian  technique,  as  exhibited  in  the  paintings. 
The  glaze  and  lustre  were  purely  Saracenic  since 


292  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


neither  tin  enamel  nor  lustre  produced  from  silver 
and  copper  was  used  in  China.” 

In  this  department  of  ceramics  is  a large  Persian 
plaque  of  the  seventeenth  century,  covered  with  the 
rare  and  highly  prized  celadon,  or  martabani  glaze, 
which  is  believed  to  be  the  finest  example  of  its 
kind  in  the  country. 

The  word  “ Celadon,”  in  technical  parlance,  is 
applied  to  that  sage  green  colour  found  on  porcelain 
and  stoneware  from  China  and  the  pottery  from 
the  Eastern  countries.  It  comes  from  a character 
in  a pastoral  romance  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
entitled  “ L’Astree,”  by  Honore  d’Urfe.  The  piece 
was  staged  and  Celadon,  a shepherd,  was  cos- 
tumed in  a grey-green  robe  similar  in  colour  to 
that  employed  in  these  ancient  green  glazed 
wares. 

The  Museum’s  plaque  measures  eighteen  inches 
in  diameter.  In  the  centre  is  an  eight-pointed  star 
of  the  size  and  shape  of  a Persian  tile,  decorated  in 
blue  with  a fearsome  dragon.  The  design  of  the  part 
surrounding  the  star  is  a very  beautiful  and  clean 
cut  pattern  of  conventionalized  carnations.  These 
are  pate-sur-pate  on  a deep  celadon  glaze.  The 
rise  of  the  dish  is  ribbed  and  the  combination  of 
these  three  styles  of  decoration  in  one  piece  — the 
celadon  glaze,  the  over  decoration  of  pate-sur-pate 
painting  and  the  underglaze  blue  decoration  on 


ITALIAN  HARPSICHORD,  16TH  CENTURY. 


General  Collections 


293 


white  ground  is  what  constitutes  the  rarity  of  the 
piece. 

The  Museum  preserves  an  extensive  collection  of 
musical  instruments  of  which  the  nucleus  was  pre- 
sented at  the  close  of  the  Centennial  Exposition  of 
1876,  when  a number  of  antique  and  curious  pieces 
were  acquired.  These  include  stringed,  wind  and 
percussion  instruments,  classified  under  their  re- 
spective heads. 

The  most  interesting  piece  in  the  collection  is  an 
Italian  harpsichord  of  the  sixteenth  century  given 
by  Mrs.  John  Harrison.  The  form  is  the  same  as 
that  of  a grand  piano  and  the  action  like  that  of  the 
spinet  except  that  it  has  several  strings  to  a key, 
whereas  the  spinet  has  but  one.  It  stands  upon  three 
wooden  legs,  hardly  in  harmony  with  the  elegance 
of  the  case,  which  is  decorated  in  the  Italian  style 
of  the  period  in  a flowing,  graceful  design.  Upon 
the  inside  of  the  case  is  an  extensive  coast  scene 
with  boats. 


CHAPTER  XXI 


THE  . WILSTACH  COLLECTION 

In  the  western  wing  of  Memorial  Hall  is  housed 
the  Wilstach  Collection  of  four  hundred  and  sixty- 
nine  oil  paintings  and  a few  water  colours  and 
works  of  sculpture,  bringing  the  whole  up  to  a little 
over  five  hundred  exhibits. 

The  collection  comes  to  the  city  through  the  gen- 
erosity of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  W.  P.  Wilstach,  whose 
handsome  residence  still  stands  at  the  northeast 
corner  of  Eighteenth  and  Walnut  Streets.  The 
former  devoted  a fortune,  which  he  had  gained  in 
mercantile  pursuits,  to  the  collecting,  during  his 
busy  life,  of  the  one  hundred  and  sixty-six  paint- 
ings and  statuary  which  formed  the  nucleus  of  the 
Wilstach  Collection.  Mrs.  Wilstach  so  increased 
the  fortune  which  she  inherited  from  her  husband 
as  to  enable  her  not  merely  to  dedicate  the  collec- 
tion to  the  perpetual  enjoyment  of  her  city,  but  also 
to  afford  it  a handsome  endowment  for  its  main- 
tenance. The  pictures  and  the  fund  were  left  in  the 
custody  of  the  Commissioners  of  Fairmount  Park. 

The  Wilstach  Bequest  represented  at  the  time  it 
294 


Ube  ‘CmUstacb  Collection 


295 


became  available  for  the  Fairmount  Park  Commis- 
sion, securities  and  cash  to  the  value  of  $624,743.07, 
and  yields  annually  an  income  of  between  twenty- 
five  and  thirty  thousand  dollars.  This  sum  has  been 
expended  at  the  discretion  of  two  or  three  members 
of  the  committee  on  the  Wilstach  Bequest,  whose 
chairman,  until  his  death  in  1909,  was  Samuel  Gus- 
tine  Thompson.  Since  the  passing  away  of  Mr. 
Thompson  this  important  post  has  been  filled  by 
John  G.  Johnson,  whose  authority  on  art  matters 
may  best  be  judged  by  the  excellence  of  his  private 
collection  of  paintings  — one  of  the  finest  in 
America. 

The  collection  is  badly  hung  and  poorly  cata- 
logued and  contains  more  than  the  usual  quota  of 
false  attributions.  In  a general  way  it  may  be  said 
that  the  collection  is  one  of  names  — a great  many 
very  distinguished  painters  being  represented  by  in- 
ferior and  often  doubtful  examples. 

The  original  bequest  contained  little  of  superlative 
merit  — the  palmy  days  of  the  collection  having 
been  those  which  immediately  followed  its  transfer 
to  the  custody  of  the  Commissioners  of  Fairmount 
Park,  when  some  of  the  most  important  examples  in 
the  collection  were  acquired. 

The  chief  of  these,  and  easily  the  gem  of  the  col- 
lection, is  the  “ Yellow  Buskin,”  by  James  A. 
McNeill  Whistler  (1834-1903),  which  was  pur- 


296  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


chased  in  1905,  the  owner  having  been  Alexander 
Reid,  Esq.,  of  Glasgow. 

The  picture  was  first  shown  in  this  country  with 
a group  of  Whistler’s  works  at  the  Chicago  World’s 
Fair.  This  group  included  “ Nocturne : Valpa- 
raiso,” “ A Chelsea  Girl,”  “ The  Fur  Jacket,”  “ The 
Princess  of  the  Land  of  Porcelain,”  and  the  “ Yel- 
low Buskin,”  and  won  for  Mr.  Whistler  his  first 
official  honours  from  his  native  land  — a medal 
World’s  Columbian  Exposition,  1893,  and  the 
Temple  Gold  medal  at  The  Pennsylvania  Academy 
of  the  Fine  Arts  in  1894,  when  the  group  was  shown 
in  Philadelphia. 

The  original  of  this  picture,  Lady  Archibald 
Campbell,  was  a woman  of  great  distinction  and 
beauty  and  a great  friend  of  the  artist.  She  sat  to 
him  off  and  on  during  a year  for  a great  many 
studies  in  different  costumes  and  poses,  none  of 
which  Whistler  completed  except  the  “ Yellow 
Buskin.” 

Pennell,  in  his  life  of  Whistler,  says  of  the  pic- 
ture: “ Some  think  the  one  portrait  of  her  (Lady 
Archibald  Campbell)  that  was  finished,  was 
Whistler’s  greatest.  It  has  not  only  the  decorative 
value  she  says  he  insisted  upon  — but  great  dis- 
tinction in  the  figure  and  face,  character  in  pose 
as  she  stands  there  fastening  her  glove,  and  splendid 
colour.  It  is  one  of  Whistler’s  several  * Arrange- 


Ube  XKHUstacb  Collection 


297 


ments  in  Black.’  Whistler  exhibited  it  first  as  a 
portrait  of  Lady  Archibald  Campbell,  but  afterward 
as  ‘ The  Yellow  Buskin,’  its  title  in  the  Wilstach 
Collection,  Philadelphia,  to  which  it  now  belongs.” 

Lady  Archibald  Campbell  says  of  it  in  a letter: 
“ The  picture  exhibited  under  the  title  of  the  ‘ Bro- 
dequin  Jaune,’  or  the  ‘ Yellow  Buskin,’  was  painted 
so  far  as  I can  remember  in  a very  few  sittings.” 

It  is  one  of  three  pictures  in  which  Whistler  tried 
to  give  movement  to  the  figure.  The  canvas  is 
clearly  one  of  the  painter’s  greatest,  exhibiting  great 
beauty  of  tone,  marvellous  textures  and  exquisite 
surface.  The  lady  stands  back  from  the  spectator, 
deep  within  the  mysterious  atmosphere  of  the  pic- 
ture. The  gamut  of  values  is  very  limited,  or  would 
be  so  to  a virtuoso  less  skilled  in  playing  the  lower 
register.  As  it  is,  the  depth  and  range  of  these  low 
tones  is  truly  rich  and  wonderful.  From  the  fur 
cape  about  her  shoulders  to  the  delicate  tip  of  her 
shoe  the  modulations  are  perfect. 

To  the  technical  handling  of  the  theme  the  woman 
herself  yields  no  tithe  of  her  personal  charm.  The 
face  is  full  of  a quiet  power  and  interest,  the  delicate 
arm  through  its  white  sleeve  shows  firm  and  sensi- 
tive, and  it  is  difficult  to  believe  the  current  story 
that  her  husband  was  dissatisfied  with  the  portrait 
as  a likeness. 

The  two  examples  of  John  Constable  (1776- 


298  ipennsghmnta  Bca&emp  ot  fftne  Hrts 


1837)  acquired  about  the  same  time  — “ Old 
Brighton  Pier,”  in  1896,  and  “ The  Pond : Hamp- 
stead Heath,”  in  1902  — compare  favourably  with 
the  Constables  of  any  European  gallery. 

The  smaller  canvas  is  juicy  and  delicious  in  colour 
with  a pearly  quality  in  its  soft  yet  virile  harmony 
of  splendid  sky,  its  realistic  stretch  of  wind-swept 
sand,  its  quivering  sea,  in  whose  choppy  waves 
merry  barks  dance  up  and  down,  its  freshness,  in 
which  one  finds  the  very  keynote  of  modernity. 

It  has  a spirit  and  plasticity  lacking  in  that  more 
weighty  masterpiece,  “ The  Pond : Hampstead 

Heath,”  in  which  the  composition  is  more  studied 
and  the  colour  less  spontaneous.  The  second  pic- 
ture is,  however,  the  more  important  of  the  two  and 
is  essentially  a museum  picture. 

The  canvas  shows  an  elaborate  mastery  of  han- 
dling and  opulent  prowess,  so  to  speak,  in  the  grace- 
ful strength  and  richness  of  the  masses.  It  is  just 
this  lordliness  of  method  that  jars  ever  so  slightly 
the  hypercritical,  and  at  the  same  time  there  is  some- 
thing splendid  in  the  way  the  painter  appears  to  say, 
“ Let  there  be  light  ” — and  there  is  light ; “ Let 
there  be  two  perfectly  delightful  poplar  trees  at  the 
edge  of  the  pond,”  and  there  they  are. 

It  is  a most  graceful  and  wonderful  landscape, 
breathing  all  the  big  qualities  of  which  the  great 
English  landscape  painter  stood  possessed,  and  in 


OLD  BRIGHTON  PIER. 
By  John  Constable. 


Ube  MUstacb  Collection 


299 


it  we  feel  powerfully  that  Constable  was  indeed  the 
one  great  artery  of  modern  landscape  work.  More 
than  the  forerunner  of  the  famous  Barbison  painters, 
who  seem  tame  in  comparison,  he  relates  more 
closely  to  the  school  of  French  impressionists  or 
even  to  our  own  landscape  school  now  in  the  making. 

Constable  was  one  of  the  earliest  painters  of 
moods  in  nature,  which  he  revealed  handsomely, 
with  stylish  and  dramatic  brushwork  — a facile 
manipulation  of  the  medium,  so  clever  as  to  be  at 
times  a thought  painty,  in  which  he  again  shows  his 
kinship  to  our  modern  landscapists. 

Now  Thomas  Gainsborough  (1727-1788)  repre- 
sents the  very  antithesis  of  this  order  of  things,  and 
his  “ Landscape,”  in  the  Wilstach  Collection,  may  be 
profitably  studied  for  purposes  of  comparison.  It 
is  quite  handsome  in  its  dry,  formal  way  and  is  ex- 
ceedingly typical  of  a period  when  landscape  was 
selected  for  its  manifest  physical  beauty,  long  before 
the  rage  for  picturesque  confusion. 

There  is  order  and  an  infinite  repose  — but  very 
little  sympathy  with  nature,  as  we  understand  her, 
— in  this  smooth,  harmonious  canvas  — in  the  earth 
road  winding  its  stately  way  amidst  venerable  trees, 
gnarled  with  age  and  abundant  in  foliage.  It  is  all 
English  peace  — and  its  tone,  upon  which  this 
school  of  painters  based  their  most  profound  atten- 
tion, is  quite  perfect. 


300  Pennsylvania  Hca&emy  ot  fine  arts 


There  is  a wall  of  such  landscapes  — one  of  the 
handsomest  groups  of  paintings  in  the  collection  — 
by  Dutch,  English  and  Spanish  masters  of  the  sev- 
enteenth century.  A Van  der  Neer,  of  Amster- 
dam (1603-1677),  despite  its  brown  shadows  is 
more  real  than  many  modem  impressionistic  land- 
scapes with  their  blue  ones:  a Jan  van  Goyen  of 
Leyden  (1596-1656),  whose  style  touches  no  re- 
sponsive chord  in  us  and  yet  whose  sky,  one  must 
admit,  is  wonderful. 

The  Jan  Both,  of  Utrecht  (1610-1650),  “Land- 
scape and  Horseman,”  is  an  interesting  and  beau- 
tiful canvas  in  the  same  vein  — mellow  in  tone, 
handsome  in  arrangement,  with  a fine  dramatic 
note  in  the  figure  of  the  rider  in  the  foreground. 

A Philip  de  Koninck,  of  Amsterdam  (1619- 
1688),  “View  of  the  Elterberg,  near  Kleef,”  is 
able  in  its  hard  way  with  a remarkable  effect  of 
distance  in  its  map-like  rendering  of  a flat,  low- 
lying  Dutch  country.  There  is  a staggering 
amount  of  detail  patiently  done,  and  for  human 
interest  in  the  foreground,  some  athletic  looking 
cows  with  bumpy  deltoids,  drawn,  one  should  say 
in  all  seriousness,  like  Heine's  camel,  from  the 
painter's  inner  consciousness,  but  immensely  hu- 
mourous in  their  grotesque  and  welcome  departure 
from  the  academic  in  cows,  of  which  we  have  so 
much.  Koninck  was  born  and  died  in  Amsterdam 


THE  POND:  HAMPSTEAD  HEATH. 

By  John  Constable. 


Zbc  THMlstacb  Collection 


301 


and  was  a pupil  of  Rembrandt.  His  pictures  are 
valuable  for  their  rarity,  some  of  the  finest  being 
in  private  English  collections.  There  is  a beauty 
in  the  South  Kensington  Museum. 

The  Jan  Steen,  of  Leyden  (1626-1679),  “The 
Fortune  Teller,”  is  an  unusual  arrangement  — the 
division  of  light  is  from  left  to  right  diagonally 
across  the  canvas,  giving  a nice  balance  and  broken 
agreeably  by  the  group  of  figures  in  the  lower  left 
hand  comer. 

The  David  Tenier  (1610-1680),  “Landscape 
and  Figures,”  harps  agreeably  upon  his  favourite 
theme  — the  return  of  the  unwilling  drunkard,  in 
the  convoy  of  his  wrathful  spouse,  while  a dog 
runs  gaily  ahead  and  barks.  Tenier’s  chief  fame 
rests  upon  these  little  scenes  of  rustic  peasant  life, 
of  which  he  painted  a great  many  of  varying  de- 
grees of  merit  but  all  interesting  in  character.  In 
this  example  the  landscape  is  unusually  fine. 

Jacob  Ruisdael,  of  Haarlem  (1625-1682),  is  rep- 
resented by  a characteristic  and  truly  splendid  ex- 
ample in  the  Wilstach  Collection  — “ Landscape 
and  Waterfall.”  Ruisdael,  Fromentin  considers 
the  most  distinguished  figure  in  the  Dutch  school 
after  Rembrandt,  and  of  all  the  Dutch  painters  the 
one  who  most  nobly  resembles  his  country. 

A landscape  by  Velasquez  (1599-1660),  “Study 
of  Columns,  Figures,  etc.,”  stands  somewhat  apart 


302  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fftne  Hrts 


from  the  others.  The  architecture  of  the  canvas 
is  magnificent  as  to  detail  and  fine  in  its  old-fash- 
ioned, decorative  way  of  painting,  which  in  its 
effect  has  much  of  the  beauty  of  tapestry,  revealing 
a little  more  of  the  substance  of  the  forms  por- 
trayed. There  are  certain  touches  in  the  canvas 
which  seem  to  speak  for  the  genuineness  of  the 
attribution  to  the  greatest  of  the  Spanish  masters, 
noticeably  in  the  small  groups  of  figures  — the  dice 
players  in  the  foreground  especially,  and  in  the 
simple  silhouette  of  the  dark  masses  against  what 
stands  for  light  in  the  sky.  There  is  a rich,  hand- 
some depth  in  the  whole  effect  of  evening  and  a 
remarkable  variety  of  closely  related  tones,  con- 
sidering the  low  scale  of  values  to  which  it  has 
been  limited. 

The  landscapes  of  the  Barbison  school  have  the 
usual  prominence  accorded  to  them  by  collectors 
of  this  epoch  and  most  of  the  examples  in  the  Wil- 
stach  Collection  were  included  in  the  original  be- 
quest, and  represent  therefore  the  taste  of  the 
donors. 

The  great  exception  to  this  is  the  recent  acqui- 
sition of  the  ebauche  of  a picture  which  is  cata- 
logued “ Solitude,”  by  Millet.  The  canvas  is  in- 
teresting in  a technical  way  for  its  state,  though 
not  particularly  characteristic. 

The  three  canvases  attributed  to  Gustave  Cour- 


Ube  Milstacb  Collection 


303 


bet  are  all  additions  since  the  death  of  Mrs.  Wil- 
stach  and  two  of  them,  at  least,  are  very  interest- 
ing, though  not  equal  to  the  example  in  the  Gibson 
Collection  in  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the 
Fine  Arts. 

One  of  the  finest  pictures  in  the  collection,  and 
the  first  acquired  after  the  transfer  of  the  bequest 
to  the  hands  of  the  Fairmount  Park  Commission, 
is  the  Delacroix,  “ L’ Amende  Honorable,”  which 
created  so  much  sensation  at  the  time  of  its  pur- 
chase, owing  to  the  price  paid,  $20,000,  which  the 
public  thought  high. 

Ferdinand  Victor  Eugene  Delacroix  (1799- 
1863)  was  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  Romantic 
School  in  France,  having  been  the  first  to  break 
away  from  the  traditions  of  the  classicists  who 
flourished  during  and  after  the  Revolution.  He 
had  his  great  vogue  under  the  reign  of  Louis 
Philippe  and  during  the  Second  Empire,  when  he 
decorated  the  ceiling  of  the  Galerie  d’ Apollon  in 
the  Louvre  which  marks  the  culmination  of  his 
peculiar  powers.  Sylvestre  regarded  him  as  the 
greatest  artist  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

“ L’ Amende  Honorable  ” may  be  classed  as  an 
early  work.  It  was  painted  in  1831  on  the  eve  of 
the  painter’s  great  popularity,  and  once  was  part 
of  a royal  collection  — the  Due  d’Orleans  having 
purchased  it  for  sixty  pounds.  The  painting  is 


304  pennssixmnta  BcafcentE  ot  ffirte  Brts 

admirable  in  its  rendering  of  the  gloom  which 
prevails  in  a church  and  is  of  an  impressive  dig- 
nity and  great  richness  of  quality  and  tone,  to 
which  the  figures  and  their  dramatic  story  are  held 
as  incident. 

Theophile  Gautier  says  of  the  picture : “ The 
scene  passes  in  the  great  convent  reception  room 
of  the  monastery.  The  shade  envelops  the  high 
arched  vaulting.  The  wall  in  the  depth  is  pierced 
with  long  windows,  with  triple  mullions.  On  the 
walls  of  the  room  vague  paintings,  frescoes  or  ta- 
bleaux, outline  themselves  in  a half  tint,  obscure 
phantoms  of  colouration,  with  a frightened  spec- 
tral life,  but  without  emerging  from  the  gloom. 
On  the  left  of  the  tableaux  is  a dais,  under  the 
throne  of  which  sits  a mitred  figure,  an  abbe  or 
archbishop  in  sacerdotal  habit,  surrounded  by  some 
acolytes,  one  of  whom  carries  a delmatique  of  rose- 
purple  — a light  which  brings  out  the  sombreness 
of  the  general  tone.  Before  the  abbe  they  drag, 
holding  him  under  the  arm,  the  condemned  to  make 
‘ amende  honorable.’  His  limbs  appear  broken  by 
a recent  torture,  and  on  his  pale  forehead  we 
read  the  terrors  of  the  prison.  In  painting,  this 
astounding  work  has  an  equal  only  in  the  banquet 
hall  in  the  Massacre  de  l’Eveque  de  Liege,  and  in 
poetry,  only  in  that  of  the  gallery  of  armour  in 
Everadnus.” 


REPOSE. 

By  Jean  Francois  Raffaelli. 


TTbe  TOlstacb  Collection 


305 


The  Jean  Frangois  Raffaelli  (1845-  ) is  the 

chef  d’ oeuvre  of  the  few  modern  French  pictures 
included  in  the  collection,  and  won  for  the  artist 
a gold  medal  when  exhibited  at  the  Paris  Exposi- 
tion of  1889.  “ Repose  ” is  the  title  and  the  sub- 

ject is  unusual  for  this  painter,  whose  chosen  field 
is  “ tout  Paris  ” out  of  doors. 

It  depicts  a charming  young  woman  in  a bed 
that  quite  overflows  the  frame,  though  the  canvas 
is  a large  one  for  Raffaelli  (76x5934).  The 
scheme  of  the  picture,  like  that  of  the  famous 
“ Olympia  ” of  Manet,  is  the  clever  dealing  with 
different  qualities  and  textures  in  whites.  The 
unit  of  value  is  white  and  the  subtle  problem  of 
painting  fair  and  beautiful  flesh  against  this  mass 
of  white  pillows  and  embroidered  coverlet  is  han- 
dled in  a masterly  manner  all-absorbing  for  the 
painter.  Stevens  tried  something  of  the  same 
theme  in  his  beautiful  canvas  of  a mother  sleeping 
in  a bed  with  her  new-born  infant.1  But  while 
Manet  had  the  contrast  of  the  black  skin  of  the 
negress  and  the  black  cat  to  emphasize  and  relieve 
the  paleness  of  his  canvas,  and  Stevens  a note  of 
brilliant  pink  in  the  bell  rope  in  the  back  of  his 
picture,  as  well  as  its  very  appealing  sentiment, 

1 Stevens  painted  two  similar  canvases  of  this  subject — one  is 
owned  by  William  M.  Chase  and  the  other  belongs  to  a private  col- 
lection in  Brussels. 


306  Pennsylvania  Beafcemy  of  fine  arts 


Raffaelli  has  done  nothing  to  break  the  colour 
note  and  holds  attention  by  force  of  very  clever- 
ness. 

Of  Antoine  Vollon  (1833-  ),  the  famous  still- 

life  painter,  the  Wilstach  Collection  guards  a fine 
example  called  “ After  the  Ball/'  a masterly  and 
powerful  canvas  with  a particularly  happy  note  of 
blue  in  the  fan  which  lies  upon  the  table,  making 
an  accent  in  a general  tone  of  quietly  painted 
brasses,  velvet  curtain  and  a bouquet  of  violets  and 
white  camellias.  His  “ Port  of  Marseilles  ” is  an 
unusual  canvas  of  much  interest. 

There  is  a small  Alfred  Stevens  in  the  original 
collection,  with  an  absurd  title,  which  out  of  re- 
spect to  Stevens  one  suppresses.  It  is  less  char- 
acteristic and  important  than  the  Stevens  in  the 
Gibson  Collection  at  The  Pennsylvania  Academy, 
but,  like  everything  from  the  brush  of  the  gifted 
Belgian,  full  of  delicate  charm  and  appreciation 
of  the  subject. 

Of  the  important  influences  on  art  in  France 
to-day  the  Wilstach  Collection  represents  Cottet 
and  Simon,  the  former  in  name  only,  and  Lucien 
Simon  by  a large  “ Family  Group/'  in  which  one 
admires  immensely  the  painting  of  the  old  lady 
holding  a child  who  occupies  the  centre  of  the  com- 
position. If  the  canvas  were  to  be  judged  by  this 
group  alone  it  would  be  called  a masterpiece,  but 


TLbc  TKMlstacb  Collection 


307 


there  is  something  fatiguing  in  the  endless  repe- 
tition of  the  type  and  one  objects  to  the  sickly 
green  quality  of  the  tone  of  the  whole  — in  at- 
tempting harmony  he  appears  to  have  overreached 
himself  and  produced  an  effect  as  though  the  per- 
sons represented  were  sitting  in  a light  that  dis- 
agreed with  them,  as  people  look  in  certain  chem- 
ically produced  lights  which  destroy  the  sense  of 
pigment  in  the  flesh. 

An  interesting  fragment  of  the  work  of  Jules 
Bastien-Lepage  (1848-1884)  is  preserved  in  his 
“ In  the  Fields,”  dated  1880,  four  years  before 
his  death,  at  the  age  of  thirty-six  years.  For  a 
romantic  interest  in  the  young  painter  whose  chef 
d’ceuvre  is  cherished  by  the  Metropolitan  Museum, 
read  the  diary  of  Marie  Bashkirtseff,  his  young 
Russian  contemporary,  whose  fate  so  resembled 
his  own.  Jules  Breton  pays  him  the  best  and  most 
modern  of  compliments  when  he  calls  him  a true 
investigator. 

The  Wilstach  Collection  owns  one  of  the  most 
famous  of  the  canvases  of  Mihaly  Munkacsy  ( 1846- 
1900),  the  Hungarian  painter  whose  real  name 
was  Lieb.  He  was  called  Munkacsy  after  his  birth- 
place, Munkacs,  in  Hungary.  “ The  Last  Day  of 
the  Condemned  ” was  purchased  by  Mr.  Wilstach 
at  a critical  moment  in  the  artist’s  career  — a cir- 
cumstance which  changed  his  life  from  one  of 


308  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  fine  arts 


poverty  and  distress  to  one  of  wealth  and  repu- 
tation. 

The  picture  illustrates  an  Hungarian  custom.  A 
condemned  prisoner  on  the  day  before  his  execu- 
tion is  visited  by  his  townspeople,  who  come  either 
out  of  curiosity  or  to  bring  contributions  toward 
a mass  for  the  criminal’s  soul. 

There  is  a certain  handsomeness  in  the  picture 
despite  its  academic,  frigid  quality  of  perfection, 
and  its  obvious  story,  told,  however,  without  sen- 
timentality. Munkacsy  was  preeminently  a story- 
teller, and  his  strength  lay  in  the  study  of  char- 
acter which  his  types  represent.  There  is  rude 
vigour  in  the  desperation  of  the  condemned  man, 
who  bears  the  horrors  of  his  situation  with  surly 
fortitude  and  palpable  suffering,  while  the  other 
figures  are  in  easy,  natural  action,  according  to 
their  several  sentiments.  For  his  faults,  Munkacsy 
used  black  without  discretion,  so  that  his  pictures 
are  nearly  monochromatic  — the  printer’s  ink,  as  it 
were,  having  gotten  mixed  with  every  colour  on 
the  palette. 

Most  of  the  atrocities  of  the  collection  came  in 
1904,  when  eighty-five  new  pictures,  chiefly  from 
the  Italian  and  Flemish  schools,  were  received,  and 
in  1906,  when  twenty-two  were  added  from  the 
French  and  Italian  art  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

The  view  point  of  the  authorities  in  acquiring 


TLbc  Mtlstacb  Collection 


309 


this  cumbrous  lumber  for  the  very  limited  gallery 
space  at  the  disposal  of  the  collection  is  difficult  to 
understand.  Even  as  cement  to  a practically  com- 
plete quota  of  able  masterpieces,  the  relevance  of 
the  purchases  is  questionable,  but  where,  as  here, 
they  frequently  represent  all  that  the  collection  has 
to  show  from  certain  schools  it  seems  unpardon- 
able. 

There  is  an  absurd  thumb-box  sketch  by  Rubens ; 
an  artificial  and  melodramatic  “ Van  Dyke;”  a 
vaguely  catalogued  “ Van  der  Heist,”  “ Dutch  Por- 
traits,” while  from  unknown  sources  spring  anony- 
mous horrors  and  a long  list  of  paintings  by  ob- 
scure outriders  of  minor  Italian  schools.  Un- 
known kinsmen  of  quasi  famous  Italian  primitives 
are  brought  to  light  in  this  extraordinary  hodge- 
podge of  which  the  most  amazing  is  an  entire  wall 
of  Spanish,  Italian,  French  and  Flemish  schools 
patched  together  like  a puzzle,  without  respect  to 
names  or  persons  and  before  which  one  sits  bewil- 
dered by  the  glitter  of  the  frames. 

From  all  of  this  one  weeds  two  good  examples 
of  Ribera  (“Lo  Spagnoletto  ” ) (1588-1656),  a 
“ St.  Sebastien  ” of  unusual  beauty  and  an  “ Archi- 
mede,”  in  which  one  sees  all  of  Ribera’s  strength 
in  the  drawing  of  an  old  man. 

A Tintoretto  (1518-1594),  “ Portrait  of  a Gen- 
tleman of  the  Pesaro  Family,”  is  an  impressive  and 


310  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  fine  Brts 


dignified  example  of  this  great  painter  of  the  Re- 
naissance. A reposeful,  massive  portrait  full  of 
subtleties  of  colour,  extremely  characteristic  of  that 
kind  of  portrait  of  imposing  personages  of  which 
Tintoretto  has  left  so  full  a record.  It  is  much 
more  slight  in  character  than  the  similar,  but  in- 
finitely stronger  canvas  by  this  painter  in  the 
Louvre,  which  typifies  the  best  of  which  he  was 
capable  in  this  direction. 

The  Cornelius  de  Vos  (1585-1651),  while  not 
the  work  of  an  inspired  master  is  an  excellent  ex- 
ample of  this  Flemish  painter.  The  canvas  rep- 
resents Antoine  Renniers,  a citizen  of  Antwerp, 
and  his  wife,  Marie  Leviter,  seated  at  a table  with 
their  children  about  them. 

The  De  Vos  dear  to  our  hearts  is  Simon,  whose 
delightful,  smiling  portrait,  until  recently  cata- 
logued, “ Portrait  of  the  Painter,”  is  the  chef 
d’ccuvre  of  the  Antwerp  Gallery.  Cornelius  has 
none  of  the  fascination  of  Simon,  beside  whom  his 
work  appears  statistical  and  rather  wooden.  There 
is  however  in  this  group  admirable  composition 
and  some  masterly  painting  of  drapery  and  still- 
life. 

“ A Princess  of  the  House  of  Sciarra,”  by  Bron- 
zino (1502-3- 1 572),  is  fine  in  design  but  thin  and 
edgy  in  colour.  A “ Crucifixion  ” by  that  fasci- 
nating Flamand,  Pieter  Breughel,  the  elder  (15?- 


Ube  Milstacb  Collection 


311 


1570),  author  of  the  splendid  “Blind  Leading  the 
Blind,”  in  the  Louvre,  and  masterpieces  in  the 
Vienna  Gallery,  is  but  a fragment,  yet  strange  and 
interesting  under  its  liberal  restoration. 

There  are  three  unimportant  canvases  by  Tiepolo 
(1696-1770),  who  marks  the  end  of  the  Renais- 
sance in  Italy.  “ Christ  Healing  the  Sick  ” has 
been  cleaned  to  the  destruction  of  its  niceties  of 
colour  and  tone,  and  “ The  Last  Supper  ” is  not 
characteristic  in  colour  — both  however  show  some 
of  the  grace  and  vivacity  of  this  great  decorator. 

A canvas  attributed  to  Francisco  Pacheo  ( 1571- 
1654),  Velasquez’  teacher,  has  much  evidence  of 
genuineness  and  exhibits  the  robust  vigour  of  a 
master.  There  is  a splendid  solidity  in  the  mod- 
elling of  the  head,  skilful  brush  work  in  the  paint- 
ing of  the  eyes,  which  are  keen  and  full  of  expres- 
sion. 

The  “ Crucifixion,”  by  Domenico  Theotocopuli, 
el  Greco  (1548-1625),  is  admirably  impressive  as 
to  subject  despite  its  badly  drawn  limbs. 

Recent  Salons  have  been  largely  drawn  upon  for 
much  of  the  modern  French  and  American  work 
in  the  gallery.  The  Wilstach  Collection  has  not, 
however,  figured  as  a patron  of  contemporary 
American  art,  in  which  department  the  gallery  is 
very  weak.  There  is  a fair  “ Still  Life,”  by  Will- 
iam M.  Chase,  and  an  interesting  portrait  of  the 


312  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  JFine  Brts 


Norwegian  painter  Thaulow,  by  John  W.  Alex- 
ander, and  Alexander  Harrison  is  represented  by 
five  canvases,  of  which  “ Le  Grand  Miroir  ” is 
characteristic  of  his  best  period. 


By  Alexander  Harrison. 


CHAPTER  XXII 


INDEPENDENCE  HALL 

The  collection  of  historic  portraits  at  Independ- 
ence Hall  is  based  upon  the  nucleus  of  canvases 
which  were  secured  to  the  institution  from  the 
famous  Peale  Museum  about  which  we  have  talked 
so  much.  At  the  time  of  its  sale  at  public  auction 
in  1854,  a number  of  Peak’s  original  portraits  of 
signers  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  Revo- 
lutionary heroes  and  men  of  affairs  in  the  early 
history  of  the  United  States,  were  bought  in  by 
the  city  and  restored  to  the  State  House,  where, 
for  so  many  years  of  the  artist’s  life,  they  had  been 
installed. 

There  are  at  present  in  the  collection  at  Inde- 
pendence Hall  over  eighty  portraits  by  Charles 
Willson  Peale  scattered  throughout  the  various 
chambers  of  the  old  colonial  building,  where  the 
pictures  are  valued  for  their  historic  significance 
and  but  little  attention  is  paid  to  their  importance 
as  works  of  art.  In  addition  to  the  Peale  portraits 
are  a delightful  and  unique  collection  of  pastel  por- 
traits by  Sharpies,  some  excellent  examples  of 

313 


314  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  jftne  Brts 


Benjamin  West,  valuable  portraits  by  Stuart,  Pine, 
Sully  and  Allan  Ramsay,  and  Rush’s  masterpiece, 
a full-length  statue  of  Washington  in  wood. 

The  arrangement  is  without  regard  to  the  artis- 
tic value  of  the  portraits,  but  follows  a very  intel- 
ligent classification  and  chronological  order.  The 
room  to  the  immediate  left  of  the  entrance  is  the 
room  in  which  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
was  signed  and  is  fittingly  dedicated  to  the  portraits 
of  the  signers  of  that  document.  A portrait  of 
Livingston  who  was  a member  of  the  committee 
that  drafted  the  Declaration,  but  who  for  some 
reason  did  not  sign  it,  one  of  John  Nixon,  who 
read  it,  and  Charles  Thomson,  the  secretary  of  the 
Congress  that  passed  it,  are  hung  in  this  room. 

The  opposite  apartment  was  the  Supreme  Court 
of  Pennsylvania,  and  here  are  hung  the  few  por- 
traits of  the  Judges  who  presided  in  this  room. 
The  hallway  contains  a miscellaneous  collection  of 
full-length  portraits  of  important  personages,  in- 
cluding a group  of  English  kings  and  queens, 
Peak’s  Chevalier  Gerard,  West’s  Governor  James 
Hamilton,  Sully’s  Lafayette,  Rembrandt  Peak’s 
Washington  and  one  or  two  others  of  no  impor- 
tance. 

On  the  second  floor,  the  Banquet  Room  is  con- 
fined exclusively  to  Colonial  and  Revolutionary 
Pennsylvanians  and  the  group  of  pastel  portraits 


Unfcepenfcence  Iball 


315 


by  Sharpies.  The  southwestern  room  contains  por- 
traits of  the  French  and  foreign  allies,  Washington 
and  his  military  family,  while  on  the  opposite  side 
the  southeast  room  is  devoted  to  the  framers  of 
the  Constitution  and  includes  a portrait  of  Wash- 
ington by  Robert  Edge  Pine,  a sketch  of  Monroe 
by  Sully,  a portrait  of  Decatur  attributed  to  Stuart, 
and  an  original  drawing  of  Richard  Dobbs  Spaight 
by  St.  Memin. 

Of  the  original  Peale  collection,  the  chef  d’ceuvre 
is  the  full-length  portrait  of  Conrad  Alexandre 
Gerard  de  Rayneval,  known  as  Chevalier  Gerard, 
the  first  French  Minister  accredited  to  the  United 
States.  He  was  one  of  the  secretaries  of  Count 
de  Vergennes,  foreign  minister  under  Louis  XVI, 
and  as  such  arranged  and  signed  the  treaty  between 
France  and  the  United  States,  February  6,  1778. 
Fie  reached  Philadelphia  early  in  June  of  that  year 
and  remained  in  this  country  until  September, 
1779,  when  he  was  succeeded  by  the  Chevalier  de 
la  Luzerne.  In  the  discussions  with  Congress  in 
1779  with  regard  to  the  conclusion  of  a treaty  of 
peace  with  Great  Britain,  and  arranging  the  bound- 
aries of  the  new  Republic,  the  Chevalier  Gerard 
bore  an  important  part,  enjoying  the  full  confidence 
of  Count  de  Vergennes.  In  1779  Yale  conferred 
upon  him  the  degree  of  LL.  D. 

The  portrait  shows  the  gentleman  dressed  in  a 


316  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  fine  Brts 


red  suit,  standing,  with  the  State  House  in  the 
distance.  It  was  painted  for  Independence  Hall 
as  a compliment  to  the  distinguished  French- 
man. 

There  is  a delightful  portrait  of  Lafayette  by 
Peale,  painted  as  a very  young  man  and  wearing 
the  uniform  of  a Continental  soldier.  This  is  a 
comparatively  recent  acquisition  and  comes  from 
the  family  of  General  Wayne,  at  Paoli.  Another 
excellent  canvas  is  the  portrait  of  Baron  Steuben, 
the  Prussian  Major  General,  who,  under  Washing- 
ton, was  made  inspector  general  of  the  army  and 
established  a system  of  discipline  and  economy  so 
thorough  that  the  whole  army  became  as  a single 
machine  in  his  hands.  Peale  shows  him  in  full 
regalia,  his  epaulettes  on  his  shoulders  and  orders 
hung  about  his  neck. 

The  Dr.  Benjamin  Rush  by  Peale  is  exceed- 
ingly characteristic,  as  are  also  the  portraits  of 
John  Adams,  Richard  Henry  Lee,  Robert  Morris, 
Martha  Washington,  Jean  Antoine  Houdon,  Count 
de  Volney  and  others.  In  fact  all  his  portraits  are 
distinguishable  for  a certain  sharp  character  read- 
ing. Peale  puts  something  of  his  own  rugged  per- 
sonality into  all  of  his  portraits. 

The  Portrait  of  Washington  by  James  Peale  is 
a fragment,  having  been  cut  down  from,  presu- 
mably, a full-length  canvas.  Such  a portrait  was 


•ffnfcepenfcence  Iball 


317 


shown  in  an  early  exhibition  of  the  Pennsylvania 
Academy,  and  since  all  trace  of  it  has  been  .lost  it 
is  possible  that  this  is  the  same.  It  shows  Wash- 
ington with  his  hand  resting  upon  his  cane  while 
in  the  background  are  the  figures  of  marching  sol- 
diers. 

The  collection  of  pastel  portraits  by  James 
Sharpies  (i 751-1811)  is  one  of  which  any  museum 
would  be  proud.  Sharpies  was  an  Englishman, 
who  came  to  this  country  about  1794.  Dunlap 
says  of  him  that  “ He  painted  in  oil ; and  I have 
seen  a composition  of  his,  wherein  several  of  Dr. 
Darwin’s  family  were  portrayed:  but  his  success- 
ful practice  in  this  country  was  in  crayons,  or  pas- 
tils, which  he  manufactured  for  himself ; and 
suited  in  size  to  the  diminutive  dimensions  of  his 
portraits,  which  were  generally  en  profile , and 
when  so,  strikingly  like.”  He  visited  many  cities 
and  towns  of  the  United  States,  carrying  letters  to 
distinguished  persons,  military,  literary  or  civil, 
with  a request  to  paint  their  portraits  for  his  col- 
lection. He  made  New  York  his  headquarters  and 
made  his  rounds  in  a large  four-wheeled  carriage 
of  his  own  model,  designed  to  carry  the  family  and 
all  his  paraphernalia  for  work,  and  drawn  by  a 
powerful  horse. 

He  is  said  to  have  worked  with  great  rapidity, 
finishing  in  two  hours  a portrait  for  which  he 


318  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  ffine  Brts 


charged  $15,  and  for  a full-face,  which  was  never 
so  successful,  $20. 

Of  the  only  known  work  of  Sharpies  that  is  of 
unquestioned  authenticity  the  National  Museum  in 
Independence  Hall  preserves  a collection  of  forty- 
five  of  his  small  portraits  in  pastel,  of  which  forty 
were  purchased  from  the  Centennial  Exposition  of 
1876,  for  their  present  destination.  Amongst  them 
are  portraits  of  Noah  Webster,  George  Washing- 
ton, John  Adams,  Thomas  Jefferson,  James  Mon- 
roe, Dolly  Madison  (at  an  advanced  age),  Aaron 
Burr,  Alexander  Hamilton,  Benjamin  Rush,  Rob- 
ert Livingston,  General  Horatio  Gates  and  General 
Anthony  Wayne.  Sharpies  made  a portrait  of 
Washington  at  Mt.  Vernon  in  1796,  which  has 
been  said  to  be  the  last  portrait  for  which  the  Gen- 
eral sat  prior  to  his  death. 

Sharpies  used  thick  grey  paper,  softly  grained 
and  of  a woolly  texture.  His  coloured  crayons 
were  kept  finely  powdered  in  small  glass  cups,  and 
he  applied  them  with  a camel  hair  pencil.  He 
usually  made  a replica  of  each  portrait,  which  he 
retained  himself  and  this  is  the  source  of  the  large 
personal  collection  whose  romantic  history  is  ably 
told  in  an  article  in  Lippincotfs  Magazine  for  De- 
cember, 1871,  written  by  Mr.  J.  W.  Palmer. 

The  collection  became  the  property  of  Mr. 
Levin  Yeardley  Winder,  a descendant  of  Governor 


PORTRAIT  OF  DR.  BENJAMIN  RUSH. 

By  J.  Sharpies. 


ITn&epenDence  Ifoail 


319 


Yeardley  of  Virginia,  whose  noble  estate  in  North- 
ampton was  taken  by  the  Governor  under  Royal 
grant.  Here  the  precious  portraits  hung  for  many 
years  accompanied  by  a miniature  catalogue  of  the 
pictures,  printed  in  Bath,  England,  and  without 
date.  This  gives  the  names  of  two  hundred  and 
twenty-nine  sitters. 

Each  one,  originally,  had  the  name  of  the  sitter 
attached,  but  in  1861,  the  United  States  troops 
came  down  upon  Northampton,  and  the  ladies  of 
Yeardley,  thrown  into  a state  of  panic  by  their 
approach  and  alarmed  for  the  safety  of  the  pic- 
tures, snatched  them  from  their  frames,  laid  them 
in  sheets  of  paper  and  distributed  them  amongst 
the  neighbours.  In  the  haste  and  confusion,  some 
were  left  on  the  walls,  and  those  were  ruined  by 
wanton  thrusts  of  bayonets  and  otherwise  des- 
troyed. Others  sent  to  the  house  of  Dr.  Browne 
were  discovered  and  appropriated  or  destroyed 
when  that  place  was  made  the  headquarters  of  the 
Federal  forces. 

There  remain,  according  to  Mr.  Palmer,  one 
hundred  and  thirty,  of  which  about  seventy  are 
identified,  and  all  but  about  ten  are  in  good  con- 
dition, and  these  not  seriously  injured. 

Sharpies  died  suddenly  in  New  York  and  was 
buried  in  the  Cemetery  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Chapel  in  Barclay  Street. 


320  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


Mr.  Palmer  gives  a sympathetic  description  of 
the  portraits : “ In  all  these  portraits  the  pur- 

pose of  the  artist  seems  to  have  been  sturdily  hon- 
est. To  produce  a likeness  which  the  eye  of  any 
friend,  however  unimaginative,  might  instantly 
recognize,  was  all  the  magic  of  his  method.  There 
are  no  experiments  in  idealizing,  no  ambitious  at- 
tempts to  portray  exceptional  character,  as  in  the 
works  of  Gilbert  Stuart.  In  every  picture  the 
countenance,  like  the  clothes,  is  the  man’s  familiar 
wear.  On  the  shoulder  is  the  dust  from  the  pow- 
dered hair,  and  in  one  portrait  I find  a scar  on  the 
cheek,  representing  a commonplace  disfigurement 
neither  romantic  nor  effective.  The  likenesses  are 
‘ homely  ’ and  with  three-quarters  of  a century 
between  the  spectator  and  the  sitter,  we  know  the 
face.” 

The  full-length  portrait  of  the  Marquis  de  Lafay- 
ette, by  Thomas  Sully,  was  originally  intended  for 
the  City  of  Philadelphia  — the  money  to  be  raised 
by  subscription  — and  was  painted  in  Philadelphia 
on  the  occasion  of  Lafayette’s  second  and  farewell 
visit  to  this  country  in  1824.  Lafayette  came  at 
the  official  invitation  of  President  Monroe  to  visit 
the  United  States.  He  sailed  from  Havre,  July  12, 
and  arrived  in  New  York,  August  15,  1824,  and 
in  the  course  of  the  next  fourteen  months  travelled 
through  the  whole  country  visiting  each  of  the 


flnfcepenbence  t>ai! 


321 


twenty-four  states  and  all  the  principal  cities,  and 
was  everywhere  received  with  tokens  of  enthusias- 
tic reverence  and  affection.  His  sixty-eighth  birth- 
day was  celebrated  in  the  White  House  in  Wash- 
ington, September  6,  1825,  on  which  occasion  a 
noble  farewell  speech  was  made  by  President 
Adams,  and  the  next  day  he  sailed  from  the  Po- 
tomac in  the  Frigate  Brandywine,  and  arrived  in 
Havre  October  5. 

He  was  in  Philadelphia  from  September  28  to 
October  5,  1824,  and  again  from  July  18  to  21, 
1825.  Sully  made  a study  of  his  head  during  the 
first  visit  and  this  original,  signed  and  dated,  is 
owned  by  Herbert  Welsh  of  Germantown. 

The  subscriptions  for  the  full-length  failed,  and 
the  portrait,  which  was  not  finished  until  1833, 
was  left  on  Sully’s  hands.  He  subsequently  pre- 
sented it  to  The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine 
Arts,  and  that  institution  later,  with  the  artist’s 
consent,  transferred  it  to  the  City  of  Philadelphia, 
in  exchange  for  West’s  painting  of  “ Paul  and 
Barnabas,”  which  had  been  bequeathed  to  the  city; 
and  thus  the  portrait  reached  the  destination  orig- 
inally intended  for  it,  and  hangs  in  the  Old  State 
House. 

It  is  a strong  piece  of  character  painting.  La- 
fayette appears  in  civilian  costume,  wears  grey 
gloves  and  carries  a cane.  His  top  coat  is  thrown 


322  Pennsylvania  Scabemy  of  jftne  arts 


open,  exposing  its  old  rose  silk  lining,  and  is  at- 
tached across  the  chest  by  a silken  cord  of  the  same 
hue.  The  fit  and  elegance  of  his  clothes  give  the 
impression  that  the  general  was  something  of  a 
fop,  but  in  no  vain  sense,  to  judge  by  the  keenly 
humourous  face  with  its  black,  bead-like  eyes,  that 
miss  nothing  of  what  is  going  forward.  In  the 
background  of  the  picture  is  a spirited  bit  of  local 
landscape  with  houses,  from  whose  windows  lean 
many  people  in  honour  of  the  arrival  of  the  dis- 
tinguished guest  in  the  escort  of  the  City  Troop. 

A second  Sully  in  the  collection  — a sketch  of 
James  Monroe  signed  and  dated  1836,  is  quite  a 
charming  thing. 

The  Museum  preserves  an  interesting  memento 
of  the  visit  to  this  country  of  Robert  Edge  Pine 
(1730-1788)  in  his  half-length  portrait  of  Wash- 
ington, presented  to  the  city  by  the  Honourable 
Benjamin  Moran,  minister  of  the  United  States  at 
Lisbon. 

Pine  came  to  this  country  in  1783  and  took  up 
his  abode  in  Philadelphia,  residing  at  the  comer  of 
High  (Market)  and  Sixth  Streets.  His  specific 
object  in  coming  to  America  was  to  paint  the  dis- 
tinguished persons  and  events  of  our  Revolution. 
But  the  country  was  too  immature  to  give  him  the 
encouragement  he  sought  and  he  had  resource  to 
portrait  painting. 


Ihibepen&ence  Ibali 


323 


He  brought  letters  of  introduction  to  Francis 
Hopkinson,  and  the  first  portrait  he  painted  in 
America  was  that  of  the  well  known  patriot.  It 
now  hangs  in  the  Historical  Society  of  Pennsyl- 
vania and  bears  the  date  1785,  and  was  considered 
by  the  son  of  the  sitter  “ a very  fine  one.”  Hop- 
kinson wrote  to  General  Washington  explaining 
the  design  Pine  had  in  view,  of  collecting  portraits 
for  historical  pictures  of  the  Revolution,  and  re- 
quested the  general  to  sit  to  him.  Washington’s 
reply  was  the  famous  “ In  for  a penny,  in  for  a 
pound  ” letter  which  has  been  so  often  quoted. 

The  portrait  in  Independence  Hall  is  of  a de- 
lightful simplicity  of  painting  and  colour.  The 
General  stands  to  the  waist,  dressed  in  his  blue 
great  coat,  with  buff  trimmings,  one  gloved  hand 
resting  upon  the  hilt  of  his  sword.  The  expression 
is  keen  and  self  composed  and  the  canvas  is  a dig- 
nified presentment. 

Pine  was  generously  patronized  by  distinguished 
people,  doubtless  owing  to  his  friendly  attitude 
toward  the  land  of  his  adoption.  Robert  Morris 
built  a house  for  him,  in  Eighth  Street,  Philadel- 
phia, which  was  adapted  for  the  exhibition  of  his 
pictures  and  the  pursuance  of  his  art.  Here  he 
died  very  suddenly  of  apoplexy. 

After  his  death  his  wife  petitioned  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Legislature  to  allow  her  to  dispose  of  her 


324  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


husband’s  pictures  by  lottery,  but  though  the  re- 
quest was  granted,  the  project  was  not  a success. 
A large  number  of  them  fell  to  the  lot  of  Daniel 
Bowen,  proprietor,  with  Edward  Savage,  of  Sav- 
age and  Bowen's  New  York  Museum,  a motley 
establishment,  half  painting  gallery,  half  museum. 
This  w~as  about  1794-  In  the  following  year  the 
museum  moved  to  Boston,  where,  under  the  title 
of  the  Columbianum  it  flourished  until  1803  when 
it  was  destroyed  by  fire.  The  paintings  at  this 
time  numbered  one  hundred  and  twenty-three, 
chiefly  by  Pine.  What  was  left  of  the  collection 
was  reinstalled,  under  the  title  of  the  New  Eng- 
land Museum,  and  finally  of  the  Boston  Museum, 
which  was  dispersed  in  1892. 

The  world  can  now  form  an  estimate  of  the 
ability  of  Pine  only  from  the  engravings  published 
of  his  works  and  the  few  portraits  of  eminent  men 
of  our  country  still  remaining  with  us.  His  most 
familiar  portraits  are  those  of  John  Wilkes,  whose 
principles  he  espoused,  and  of  David  Garrick,  whose 
friendship  he  possessed.  He  made  four  portraits 
of  the  latter,  of  which  the  most  important  is  Gar- 
rick seated  at  a table  reading  Macbeth,  which  hangs 
in  the  National  Portrait  Gallery  in  London. 

The  portraits  of  Francis  Hopkinson  and  of  Dr. 
Johnson,  president  of  Columbia  College,  are  fine 
examples  of  the  painter's  grasp  of  character,  and 


Unt>epen&ence  Ibaii 


325 


surpass,  in  colour,  the  work  of  his  American  con- 
temporaries, with  the  exception  of  Stuart. 

An  interesting  specimen  of  the  art  of  Saint 
Memin  (17701852)  is  preserved  in  the  drawing 
of  Richard  Dobbs  Spaight,  the  Governor  of  North 
Carolina.  Saint  Memin  presents  a most  interesting 
study  to  those  interested  in  Americana.  He  was 
a Frenchman,  born  in  Dijon,  educated  at  Paris  and 
served  in  the  army  of  the  princes  during  the  French 
Revolution.  He  came  to  this  country  in  1793  with 
the  idea  of  introducing  a machine  for  making  sil- 
houettes, the  rage  for  which  was  in  its  incipiency.  A 
compatriot  of  Saint  Memin’s,  named  Chretien,  had 
invented  a machine  in  1786,  called  a physionotrace, 
by  means  of  which  the  human  profile  could  be 
copied  with  mathematical  accuracy,  and  which  had 
been  a great  success  in  France.  Saint  Memin  con- 
structed such  a machine  with  his  own  hands,  ac- 
cording to  his  understanding  of  it,  and  also  made 
a pantograph,  by  which  to  reduce  the  original  de- 
sign. His  life-size  profiles  on  pink  paper,  finished 
in  black  crayon,  were  reduced  by  the  pantograph  to 
a size  small  enough  to  be  engraved  within  a per- 
fect circle  two  inches  in  diameter.  The  machine 
gave  of  course  only  the  outline,  the  finishing  being 
done  in  one  case  with  crayon,  and  in  the  other  with 
the  graver  and  roulette,  by  which  means  he  took, 
in  this  country,  more  than  eight  hundred  portraits. 


326  Pennsylvania  academy  of  fine  arts 


The  drawing  and  engraved  plate  with  a dozen 
proofs  became  the  property  of  the  sitter  for  the 
price  of  $33,  the  artist  reserving  only  a few  proofs 
of  each  portrait.  With  these  proofs  he  formed  two 
sets  and  wrote  upon  each  impression  the  name  of 
the  subject.  These  two  complete  collections  were 
brought  to  this  country  in  1859  and  one  of  them  is 
now  in  the  Corcoran  Gallery,  Washington. 

While  in  this  country,  Saint  Memin  resided  prin- 
cipally in  Philadelphia  and  New  York,  but  made 
visits  to  other  cities  making  portraits.  WTiile  in 
Philadelphia  he  secured  a profile  of  Washington, 
which  is  interesting  as  being  the  last  portrait  of 
him  that  was  taken  from  life. 

In  1814  he  returned  to  France,  and  three  years 
later,  was  made  the  director  of  the  Museum  at 
Dijon,  in  which  office  he  remained  until  his  death. 

The  portrait  of  Spaight  is  a very  charming  and 
representative  drawing  by  this  interesting  and  dis- 
tinguished man.  The  medium  is  handled  with 
great  delicacy,  the  pink  paper  imparts  an  impres- 
sion of  warmth  and  life  to  the  features,  themselves 
rendered  with  wonderful  sympathy  and  express- 
iveness. The  face  is  very  much  alive  and  the  cos- 
tume of  the  period,  which  the  sitter  wears,  with 
its  stock  and  ruffled  shirt,  lends  itself  delightfully 
to  the  spirit  of  the  medium. 

An  extremely  interesting  canvas,  and  one  pos- 


PORTRAIT  OF  JAMES  HAMILTON. 
By  Benjamin  West. 


•ffnfcepen&ence  f)all 


327 


sessing  a romantic  history,  is  the  full-length  por- 
trait of  James  Hamilton,  the  Royal  Governor  of 
Pennsylvania,  painted  by  Benjamin  West.  It  was 
bequeathed  by  his  descendant,  Henry  Beckett,  to  the 
Spring  Garden  Institute  and  by  that  institution 
given  to  the  city. 

The  Philadelphia  Times  of  November  6,  1892, 
published  a long  and  interesting  account  of  the  dis- 
covery of  the  picture,  after  some  years  of  oblivion, 
by  Mr.  Charles  Henry  Hart,  which  attributes  the 
canvas  according  to  the  popular  tradition,  to  Mat- 
thew Pratt,  West’s  distinguished  pupil.  This  state- 
ment Mr.  Hart  corrects  in  the  light  of  later  devel- 
opments in  a letter  to  the  Times  which  appears 
under  the  date  of  October  3,  1894. 

That  there  was  in  existence  a portrait  of  James 
Hamilton,  the  sometime  Governor  of  Pennsylvania, 
was  known  to  a select  few  interested  in  the  history 
of  American  art.  It  had  belonged  to  Henry  Beck- 
ett, a descendant  in  the  female  line,  who  died  at 
Bonaparte  Park,  Bordentown,  New  Jersey,  Sep- 
tember 11,  1871. 

It  was  Mr.  Hart,  always  interested  in  such  early 
portraits,  who  started  on  what  appeared  to  be  at 
first  a hopeless  quest  of  the  picture.  It  was  found 
that  the  Spring  Garden  Institute,  “ having  no  place 
to  hang  the  portrait,”  had  consented  to  the  idea 
of  the  executor  of  Mr.  Beckett,  that  the  picture  be 


328  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


presented  to  the  city,  and  this  was  done.  Further 
investigation  proved  that  the  canvas  had  for  a time 
hung  in  the  Hall  of  Fairmount  Park,  near  the 
Green  Street  entrance,  but  that  it  had  been  removed 
to  make  way  for  the  Pompeian  views,  presented  to 
the  city  by  Mr.  Welsh.  This  clue  led  to  its  dis- 
covery buried  in  the  lecture  room  of  Horticultural 
Hall,  and  it  was  subsequently  transferred  to  the 
rooms  of  the  Park  Commissioners  in  City  Hall. 

Upon  full  presentation  of  the  facts  to  the  Com- 
missioners of  City  Property,  steps  were  taken  to 
have  the  picture  hung  in  the  Old  State  House  — 
the  Capitol  of  the  Province  at  the  time  when  James 
Hamilton  was  its  Governor,  and  of  which  building 
his  famous  father,  Andrew  Hamilton,  was  the 
architect. 

The  tradition  accompanying  the  picture,  which 
had  appeared  repeatedly  in  print  for  nearly  a cen- 
tury, was  that  the  portrait  was  the  work  of  Mat- 
thew Pratt,  and  furthermore  that  it  was  the  picture 
that  had  started  him  upon  his  successful  career  as 
a portrait  painter,  and  so  it  was  labelled  in  its  new 
position. 

The  portrait  had  been  badly  cared  for  and  at  one 
time,  as  was  plainly  visible,  the  head  and  bust  had 
been  cut  out  of  the  canvas  and  subsequently  re- 
placed when  the  entire  canvas  was  relined.  On  its 
recovery  the  picture  was  entrusted  to  the  care  of 


PORTRAIT  OF  WILLIAM  ALLEN. 
By  Benjamin  West. 


Hn&epenfcence  tbali 


329 


Mr.  Wilkinson,  an  efficient  restorer  of  pictures, 
and  when  the  layers  of  dirt  and  varnish  were 
removed  from  Pratt’s  “ Hamilton,”  it  was  found 
to  bear  the  careful  signature  of  “ B.  West  1767. 
London.”  upon  its  face! 

The  canvas  is  90  x 60  and  shows  the  figure  life 
size.  It  is  no  less  remarkable  as  a painting  than 
it  is  interesting  as  a portrait. 

A second  interesting  portrait  by  Benjamin  West 
is  that  of  William  Allen,  Chief  Justice  of  the  State 
of  Pennsylvania  for  a period  of  twenty-three  years. 

He  was  born  in  Philadelphia  in  1703,  and  died 
in  London  in  1780,  at  the  age  of  seventy-seven 
years.  No  one  in  the  whole  history  of  the  city 
of  Philadelphia  has  more  fitting  place  in  the  mem- 
ory of  the  old  State  House  than  William  Allen. 
He  was  at  the  death  of  his  father  the  richest  man 
in  Philadelphia,  and  gave  away  in  charities  his  sal- 
ary, which  he  always  refused  to  appropriate  to  his 
own  use. 

On  the  15th  of  October,  1730,  he  made  the  first 
purchase  of  the  ground  upon  which  stands  Inde- 
pendence Hall,  for  a State  House  for  Pennsylvania. 
He  paid  for  it  with  his  own  money  and  took  the 
deeds  in  his  own  name  at  the  request  of  his  father- 
in-law,  Andrew  Hamilton,  the  chairman  of  the 
committee  on  procuring  a site,  and  subsequently, 
architect  of  the  edifice. 


330  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  jfine  Brts 


When  all  the  difficulties  of  the  enterprise  were 
removed  a few  years  later  he  conveyed  the  prop- 
erty to  the  proper  authorities  and  was  reimbursed 
by  the  province. 

In  1735  he  was  made  Mayor  of  the  city,  and  the 
next  year,  when  the  State  House  was  nearly  com- 
plete inaugurated  its  Banqueting  Hall  by  giving 
therein  a feast  to  all  the  citizens  and  strangers  in 
the  city,  described  in  a contemporaneous  account 
as  “ the  most  grand  and  the  most  elegant  enter- 
tainment that  has  been  made  in  these  parts  of 
America.” 

In  1751  he  was  appointed  Chief  Justice  of  Penn- 
sylvania and  held  the  office  until  1774.  The  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  Province  was  held  in  the  West 
room  of  the  State  House,  directly  opposite  that  in 
which  independence  was  voted  and  the  Continental 
Congress  sat,  and  here  the  portrait  hangs. 

William  Allen’s  principal  estate  lay  in  the  an- 
thracite coal  region  of  Pennsylvania,  and  from  its 
original  owner  Allentown  derives  its  name.  Allen 
collaborated  with  Franklin  in  founding  the  College 
of  Philadelphia  (now  the  University  of  Pennsyl- 
vania) and  was  prominent  amongst  those  gentle- 
men of  Pennsylvania  who  were  the  first  in  Amer- 
ica to  organize  an  expedition  to  the  Arctic  Re- 
gions in  quest  of  a Northwest  Passage. 

Chief  Justice  Allen  was  an  early  friend  and 


Unfcepenfcence  Iball 


331 


patron  of  Benjamin  West,  and  he  lived  to  see  his 
confidence  in  the  young  painter  verified.  This  pro- 
duced an  intimacy  between  West  and  the  Allen 
family  which  lasted  throughout  the  life  of  the 
painter.  There  is  preserved,  by  the  descendants  of 
William  Allen  in  England,  a picture  by  West  of  a 
family  fete  in  the  grounds  of  Governor  John 
Penn’s  country  seat  — Lansdowne  — upon  the 
banks  of  the  Schuylkill.  It  contains  portraits  of 
the  governor  and  his  wife,  Ann,  eldest  daughter  of 
Chief  Justice  Allen,  whom  he  married  May  31, 
1766,  and  of  all  the  Allen  family  and  of  West 
himself. 

A group  of  seven  pictures  presented  to  The 
Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts  by  Mrs. 
Joseph  Harrison,  in  the  custody  of  Independence 
Hall,  for  as  long  as  it  shall  remain  a National 
Museum,  includes  West’s  third  picture  in  the  col- 
lection. It  is  “ Penn’s  Treaty  with  the  Indians,” 
a large  composition  more  interesting  as  a relic  than 
as  a work  of  art. 

The  picture  includes  the  portraits  of  West’s 
father  and  of  his  half-brother,  Thomas  West  of 
Reading.  They  are  to  be  found  in  the  group  of 
Friends  that  accompany  William  Penn.  Thomas 
stands  immediately  behind  Penn,  resting  on  his 
cane. 

Mrs.  Plarrison,  the  donor  of  the  picture,  was 


1 


332  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  jfine  Brts 


the  widow  of  Joseph  Harrison,  the  prominent  en- 
gineer, who  with  two  partners  built  the  locomo- 
tives and  rolling  stock  for  the  St.  Petersburg  and 
Moscow  Railway,  in  Russia.  For  his  distinguished 
services  to  the  country  the  Emperor  Nicholas  dec- 
orated him,  at  the  time  of  the  completion  of  the 
bridge  across  the  Neva,  with  the  Order  of  St.  Ann, 
to  which  was  attached  a gold  medal.  After  exe- 
cuting other  extensive  contracts  for  the  Russian 
Government  Mr.  Harrison  returned  to  Philadel- 
phia in  1852,  and  built  the  fine  mansion  at  the 
southeast  corner  of  Rittenhouse  Square  and  Nine- 
teenth Street,  which  still  stands  intact  and  unoc- 
cupied since  Mrs.  Harrison’s  death.  Joseph  Har- 
rison was  a very  intelligent  patron  of  art,  and  to 
his  taste  and  judgment  Philadelphia  owes  many  of 
its  richest  treasures. 

The  group  of  paintings  referred  to  includes, 
besides  West’s  “ Treaty,”  portraits  of  King  Will- 
iam III,  Queen  Mary,  Queen  Anne,  Kings  George  I, 
George  II  and  George  III,  of  which  the  latter,  by 
Allan  Ramsay,  is  the  most  important.  It  was 
painted  by  order  of  the  King,  in  1767,  for  the 
State  House  in  Philadelphia,  but  was  not  sent  out 
because  of  the  troubles  between  the  colonies  and 
the  mother  country.  It  was  purchased  by  Joseph 
Harrison,  in  London,  about  the  middle  of  the  last 
century,  when  he  heard  of  its  history  and  secured 


Unbepettbence  ttmll 


333 


by  him  to  its  original  destination.  The  canvas  is 
a beautiful  one,  depicting  the  young  king  in  his 
regal  robes  of  State  and  wearing  a soft,  youthful 
expression  even  in  excess  of  his  twenty-nine  years, 
and  is  particularly  attractive  in  colour  and  style. 

The  National  Museum  in  Independence  Hall 
preserves  the  masterpiece  of  William  Rush,  the 
first  American  born  sculptor  who  worked  in  resist- 
ing materials.  He  was  born,  according  to  the 
statement  of  Mr.  Charles  Henry  Hart  in  Browere’s 
“ Life  Masks  of  Great  Americans,”  on  July  4, 
1756,  “being  the  fourth  in  direct  descent  from 
John  Rush,  who  commanded  a troop  of  horse  in 
Cromwell’s  army,  and,  having  embraced  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Quakers,  came  to  Pennsylvania  the 
year  following  the  landing  of  William  Penn.  From 
the  emigrant  John  Rush  was  also  descended,  in 
the  fifth  generation,  the  celebrated  Benjamin  Rush, 
physician  and  politician,  and  one  of  the  signers  of 
the  Declaration  of  Independence.  The  father  of 
William  was  Joseph  Rush,  who  married,  at  Christ 
Church,  Philadelphia,  September  19,  1750,  Re- 
becca Lincoln,  daughter  of  Abraham  Lincoln,  of 
Springfield  Township,  now  in  Delaware  County, 
Pennsylvania.  She  was  of  the  same  family  as 
Abraham  Lincoln,  the  martyr  President  of  the 
United  States.  I am  thus  minute  in  tracing  the 
ancestry  of  William  Rush,  in  order  to  establish  and 


334  ©ennsEhmnta  Bca&ems  of  jftne  Hrts 


place  upon  record,  beyond  a question  or  doubt,  that 
he  was  the  first  American  sculptor  by  birth  and 
parentage,  and  thus  set  at  rest  the  claim,  so  fre- 
quently made,  that  this  honour  belongs  to  John 
Frazee,  a man  not  born  until  1790. 

“ Rush  served  in  the  army  of  the  Revolution, 
and  it  was  not  until  after  peace  had  settled  on  the 
land  that  he  seems  to  have  turned  his  attention  to 
art.  He  soon  became  noted  for  the  life-like  qual- 
ities he  put  into  the  figureheads  he  was  called  upon 
to  carve,  and  so  noted  did  these  works  become, 
that  many  orders  came  to  him  from  Britain  for 
figureheads  for  English  ships.  The  story  is  told 
that  when  a famous  East  Indiaman,  the  Ganges, 
sailed  up  that  river  to  Calcutta,  with  a figure  of  a 
river-god  carved  by  Rush,  at  its  prow,  the  natives 
clambered  about  it  as  an  object  of  adoration  and 
of  worship.  Benjamin  Latrobe,  the  noted  archi- 
tect, in  a discourse  before  the  Society  of  Artists 
of  the  United  States,  in  1811,  says,  speaking  of 
Rush : ‘ His  figures,  forming  the  head  or  prow  of 
a vessel,  place  him,  in  the  excellence  of  his  atti- 
tudes and  actions,  among  the  best  sculptors  that 
have  existed;  and  in  the  proportion  and  drawing 
of  his  figures,  he  is  often  far  above  mediocrity  and 
seldom  below  it.  There  is  a motion  in  his  figures 
that  is  inconceivable.  They  seem  rather  to  draw 
the  ship  after  them  than  to  be  impelled  by  the 


lln&epen&ence  Iball 


335 


vessel.  Many  are  of  exquisite  beauty.  I have  not 
seen  one  on  which  there  is  not  the  stamp  of 
genius.’  ” 

Rush’s  full-length  statue  of  Washington,  in 
wood,  was  made  about  1814,  and  was  one  of  a 
number  of  exhibits  by  the  artist  shown  in  the  Fifth 
Annual  Exhibition  of  The  Pennsylvania  Academy 
of  the  Fine  Arts,  in  1815.  It  stood  for  some  time 
in  the  Hall  of  the  Washington  Benevolent  Society, 
on  Third  Street  near  Spruce,  and  in  1824  was 
placed  in  Independence  Hall,  on  the  occasion  of 
Lafayette’s  visit  to  the  city. 

It  was  carved  from  Rush’s  recollection  of  Wash- 
ington with  the  aid  of  Houdon’s  celebrated  bust 
of  the  general,  which  it  closely  resembles.  City 
Councils  purchased  the  statue  in  1831  for  $500. 
Its  present  location  in  the  Hall  of  Independence  is 
in  the  Supreme  Court  Room  to  the  right  of  the 
entrance,  where  it  presents  a most  dignified  and 
dominating  personage.  The  character  of  the  fig- 
ure is  slightly  affected  and  the  pose  inclines  to 
the  artificial.  We  are  wont  to  picture  Washington 
as  a more  robust  personality,  but  there  is  much 
charm  in  the  rendering  and  a certain  graciousness 
in  the  inclination  of  the  figure.  Washington 
stands  supported  by  a broken  column,  is  costumed 
in  the  conventional  dress  of  the  early  Republic,  with 
knee  breeches,  ruffled  cravat  and  stock,  buckled 


336  Pennsylvania  academy  of  ffine  arts 


shoes  and  all  the  appointments  of  a gentleman  of 
cultivation  and  position.  He  holds  in  his  right 
hand  a scroll,  while  his  left  lifts  the  drapery,  whose 
voluminous  folds  have  been  introduced  for  the  pur- 
poses of  giving  sculpturesque  mass. 

A cast  of  Houdon’s  bust  of  Washington  is  to 
be  found  on  the  second  floor  in  the  Banquet  Hall, 
and  may  be  studied  for  purposes  of  comparison. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 


THE  HISTORICAL  SOCIETY  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 

The  art  collection  of  the  Historical  Society  of 
Pennsylvania  represents  a gradual  development, 
chiefly  by  gift  with  an  occasional  purchase  from 
funds  contributed  by  members,  of  such  works  as 
owing  to  their  historic  value  have  place  in  such  a 
reliquary.  While  the  artistic  point  of  view  has  been 
a secondary  consideration,  the  Society  has  become 
possessed  quand  meme  of  a number  of  very  dis- 
tinguished canvases  — portraits  for  the  most  part 
of  prominent  citizens  by  prominent  American 
painters. 

The  Society  was  founded  in  1824  and  led  a no- 
madic existence,  unfavourable  to  the  accumulation 
of  treasures,  until  1882,  when  the  trustees  purchased 
a permanent  site  and  the  Society  was  installed  in  the 
historic  mansion  of  Major  Robert  Patterson,  at 
Thirteenth  and  Locust  Streets.  Previous  to  the  ac- 
quisition of  the  old  Patterson  house,  so  well  remem- 
bered as  one  of  the  homes  which  gave  character  to 
our  city,  the  Historical  Society  occupied  as  tenant 
various  restricted  quarters,  of  which  the  first  was  in 

337 


338  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


Carpenter’s  Court.  The  Athenaeum,  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Hospital,  and  similar  institutions  subsequently 
gave  it  shelter,  at  nominal  rentals,  until  by  the  grad- 
ual accumulation  of  wealth  and  power  it  was  able 
to  secure  a habitation  of  its  own.  The  first  building 
was  destroyed  in  1902  for  the  erection  of  the  new 
and  highly  practical  fire-proof  building,  greatly  en- 
larged to  fit  the  growing  needs  of  the  Society. 

The  first  work  of  art  came  to  the  Society  on 
March  20,  1833,  when  Granville  Penn  presented 
what  he  considered  “ an  original  portrait  of  Will- 
iam Penn,  his  grandfather.”  This  is  the  youthful 
portrait  in  armour,  of  which,  according  to  the 
legend,  there  were  two  at  Stoke  Poges,  until  this 
presentation  was  made.  No  author  has  ever  been 
assigned  to  the  picture  which  latter  day  critics  pro- 
nounce only  a copy  from  a doubtful  original. 

The  Society,  having  no  settled  habitation,  did  not 
know  what  to  do  with  the  picture  and  left  it  in  the 
custody  of  John  Vaughan  for  many  years. 

By  subsequent  gifts,  the  Penn  Collection  has 
grown  to  considerable  proportions  and  includes  at 
least  one  valuable  canvas,  of  whose  authorship  un- 
fortunately there  is  some  uncertainty.  This  is  the 
admirable  portrait  of  Admiral  Penn,  father  of  the 
founder  of  Pennsylvania,  attributed  to  Sir  Peter 
Lely,  or  Van  der  Faes  (1617-1680),  a celebrated 
portrait  painter  of  Dutch  descent,  who  flourished 


Qbc  HMstorical  Society  of  Pennsylvania  339 


at  the  Court  of  Charles  I and  was  made  first  painter 
to  Charles  II,  the  beauties  of  whose  court  were  the 
subjects  of  his  masterpieces. 

The  doubt  about  the  attribution  is  all  in  the  pic- 
ture’s favour  as  the  point  urged  is  that  it  is  too  good 
for  Lely.  Certainly  the  portrait  is  a delightful  one, 
showing  the  Admiral  facing  front,  with  a flowing 
white  tie  and  a good-humoured  expression  on  his 
weather-beaten  face.  The  painting  is  the  work 
of  a very  fluent  brushman  and  a good  colourist 
and  is  quite  free  from  the  affectations  of  Lely’s 
style. 

The  picture  is  from  the  same  source  as  the  Penn 
in  Armour,  Granville  Penn  having  presented  a num- 
ber of  relics  to  the  Society  as  the  fruits  of  his  visit 
to  this  country. 

The  most  important  pictures  in  the  collection  of 
the  Historical  Society,  from  the  historic  standpoint, 
are  the  portraits  of  Gustavus  Hesselius  and  of  his 
wife  Lydia,  painted  by  Gustavus  Hesselius  (1682- 
17 55),  who  was  the  earliest  painter  to  come  to 
America  and  whose  life  and  works  in  this  country 
have  been  made  the  subject  of  an  interesting  and 
valuable  article  by  Mr.  Hart.1 

The  portraits  in  question  come  down  through  the 
granddaughter  of  the  sitters,  Eliza  Henderson,  who 
married  Adolph  Ulric  Wertmuller,  and  they  were 

1 Harper's  Monthly.  March,  1898. 


340  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


presented  to  the  Society  by  the  late  Charles  Hare 
Hutchinson. 

Until  the  presentation  of  these  portraits  the  name 
of  Gustavus  Hesselius  as  a painter  was  unknown  to 
history.  Those  who  have  given  attention  to  the 
subject  have  known  of  Hesselius  (John)  by  whom, 
according  to  Robert  Gilmore  of  Baltimore,  “ the 
greater  part  of  the  family  portraits  in  the  old  man- 
sions of  Maryland  were  painted,  and  that  in  a re- 
spectable manner.”  He  was  the  early  instructor  of 
Charles  Willson  Peale,  whose  son  Rembrandt,  in 
his  memoir  of  his  father,  published  in  the  Encyclo- 
paedia Americana,  calls  him  “ a portrait  painter 
from  the  school  of  Sir  Godfrey  Kneller.”  He  was 
in  fact  the  American  born  son  and  pupil  of  Sweden’s 
pioneer  painter  in  this  land. 

Gustavus  Hesselius  is  of  the  utmost  importance 
in  the  study  of  the  beginnings  of  American  art  for 
several  reasons.  In  the  first  place  he  disproves  a 
popular  fiction  — that  the  birth  of  art,  as  we  are 
pleased  to  term  it  — occurred  in  New  England  with 
the  arrival  of  John  Smybert,  who  came  over  from 
Scotland  in  1729,  or,  according  to  some  authorities, 
with  the  arrival  in  the  colonies  in  1715  of  John 
Watson,  who  in  that  year  set  up  his  easel  in  the 
capital  of  New  Jersey,  Perth  Amboy. 

Hesselius  antedates  both  of  these  worthies,  for 
there  is  noted  on  the  old  Swedish  records  the  arrival 


Ube  IMstorical  Society  of  Pennsylvania  341 


of  two  brotliers  Hesselius  who  arrived  at  Christina, 
now  Wilmington,  Delaware,  on  the  first  of  May, 
1711,  while  a later  entry  oddly  states  that  “ Mons. 
Gustaff  Hesselius,  after  a few  weeks  flyted  on  ac- 
count of  his  business  to  Philadelphia.” 

Gustavus  Hesselius  was  born  at  Folkarna,  De- 
larne,  Sweden,  in  1682,  and  was  consequently  the 
senior  of  Watson  by  three  years  and  of  Smybert  by 
two.  He  came  of  a family  distinguished  for  its 
piety  and  learning  and  his  father  and  four  brothers 
were  dedicated  to  the  church.  The  Hesselius  family 
was  intimately  associated  with  the  establishment  of 
the  Swedish  religion  in  this  country,  two  of  the 
brothers  having  been  commissioned  by  the  king, 
Charles  XII,  to  go  to  America  and  preach  the  gospel 
to  the  Swedes  along  the  Delaware. 

Hesselius  is  important  for  another  reason.  He 
it  was  to  whom  was  given,  ten  years  later,  the  first 
public  art  commission  in  this  country  — to  paint  an 
altar-piece  representing  “ The  Last  Supper  ” for  the 
Church  of  St.  Barnabas  in  Queen  Anne’s  parish,  in 
the  province  of  Maryland.  Unfortunately  the  paint- 
ing perished  with  the  church  in  1773. 

In  1773  he  was  back  again  in  Philadelphia,  for 
in  that  year  he  purchased  a house  and  lot  on  the 
north  side  of  High  Street  below  Fourth,  where  he 
resided  until  his  death,  May  25,  1755.  That  he  con- 
tinued his  vocation  on  a broad  scale  is  shown  by  an 


342  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  ot  ffine  Brts 


advertisement  in  the  Pennsylvania  Packet  for  De- 
cember ii,  1740: 

“ Painting  done  in  the  best  manner  by  Gustavus 
Hesselius  from  Stockholm  and  John  Winter  from 
London.  Viz.,  Coats  of  Arms  drawn  upon  Coaches, 
Chaises,  etc.,  or  any  kind  of  Ornaments,  Landskips, 
Signs,  Shew-boards,  Ship  and  House  Painting, 
gilding  of  all  sorts,  writing  in  gold  or  colour,  old 
pictures  cleaned  or  mended,  etc.” 

Hesselius  was  probably  the  painter  of  many  of 
the  early  portraits,  whose  authorship  is  unknown. 
One  has  already  been  identified  as  from  his  easel, 
that  of  Robert  Morris,  the  father  of  the  financier 
of  the  Revolution,  in  the  Nixon  Collection  of  the 
Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania.  From  these 
three  it  appears  that  the  Swede  was  a painter  of  no 
small  parts.  The  character  is  good,  the  treatment 
simple  and  direct,  and  the  colour,  if  monochromatic, 
is  of  a pleasant  greyness,  and  he  knew  something  of 
values. 

The  Historical  Society  owns  an  exceedingly  inter- 
esting collection  of  early  portraits  by  Benjamin 
West,  including  four  that  were  painted  by  the  artist 
before  his  departure  for  Europe,  and  consequently 
before  he  had  any  regular  instruction  whatsoever. 

Of  these  four  canvases  two  represent  the  early 
patrons  of  West  — William  Henry,  for  whom  he 
painted  “ The  Death  of  Socrates,”  and  Provost 


Ube  Ibtstorical  Society  of  J>enn8£lv>ania  343 


William  Smith,  under  whose  special  tutelage  West 
imbibed  so  much  of  the  classic  lore  that  was  to 
influence  his  career.  The  third  of  the  early  por- 
traits is  of  Mrs.  Ann  Henry,  wife  of  the  above,  and 
the  fourth  and  best  is  a portrait  of  Mrs.  Thomas 
Hopkinson,  nee  Mary  Johnson. 

The  portraits  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Henry  represent 
the  great-grandparents  of  Dr.  Jordan,  the  present 
Librarian  of  the  Historical  Society,  by  whom  they 
are  presented  to  the  institution.  Exceedingly  in- 
teresting and  quaint  they  are  in  their  rigid  poses, 
but  extraordinarily  thorough  considering  the  lad’s 
tender  years  and  colossal  inexperience.  They 
show  what  courage  he  had  and  they  also  show  in 
many  ways  that  he  had  seen  and  noted  good  por- 
traits and  knew  what  the  conventional  requirements 
were. 

William  Henry  was  an  American  of  Scotch-Irish 
ancestry,  an  inventor  and  a manufacturer  of  fire- 
arms in  Lancaster,  Pennsylvania.  He  lived  from 
1729  to  1786,  was  a member  of  the  Continental  Con- 
gress, 1784-5,  and  in  1768  invented  the  self-moving 
or  sentinel  register.  He  was  among  those  ante- 
cedent to  Fitch  and  Fulton  in  the  application  of 
steam  as  a motive  power  to  propel  boats. 

The  portrait  of  Provost  Smith  was  done  about 
the  same  time  and  is  even  more  naive.  It  resembles 
indeed  a primitive  in  the  crudity  of  its  drawing,  the 


344  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  fftne  Brts 


exaggeration  of  the  features,  but  it  is  an  earnest  try 
for  expression  and  is  worthy  of  all  serious  consid- 
eration. 

The  Rev.  William  Smith,  D.  D.,  was  born  near 
Aberdeen,  Scotland,  September  7,  1727.  He  was 
important  in  the  history  of  Philadelphia  as  the  first 
provost  of  the  College  of  Philadelphia,  and  an  early 
patron  of  the  fine  arts  and  belles  lettres. 

The  picture  in  the  possession  of  the  Historical 
Society  is  known  for  purposes  of  identification  as 
“ William  Smith  as  St.  Ignatius,”  on  account  of  the 
following  incident : Governor  Hamilton  had  placed 
at  West’s  disposal  his  collection  of  pictures,  amongst 
which  was  a St.  Ignatius  by  Murillo.  West  made 
a copy  of  the  picture  and  won  the  admiration  of 
Provost  Smith,  who,  always  on  the  lookout  for 
something  new  to  suggest  to  his  pupil,  conceived  the 
idea  that  portraiture  might  be  elevated  above  a mere 
physical  likeness,  and  acting  upon  the  suggestion, 
West  made  a portrait  of  his  friend  in  the  attitude 
and  style  of  the  Saint.  The  result  was  a grateful 
offering  from  the  artist  to  the  sitter. 

It  came  to  the  Society  as  a gift  from  Horace 
Wemyss  Smith,  his  great-grandson,  on  October  10, 
1871,  on  the  occasion  of  the  installation  of  the 
Society  in  the  Hall  of  the  Pennsylvania  Hospital, 
which  had  been  originally  built  to  receive  that  great 
picture  by  the  artist,  “ Christ  healing  the  Sick.” 


PORTRAIT  OF  WILLIAM  HAMILTON  AND  HIS  NIECE,  ANN 
HAMILTON  LiTLE. 

By  Benjamin  West. 


Ubc  Ibistorical  Society  of  Pennsylvania  345 


The  portrait  of  Mrs.  Thomas  Hopkinson,  in  the 
Hopkinson  Collection,  is  a remarkably  graceful  and 
charming  picture  — one  that  would  do  credit  to 
any  period  of  West’s  career  — though  painted  be- 
fore he  was  twenty-one  years  of  age. 

West’s  chef  d’ceuvre  in  the  Historical  Society  is 
the  full-length  portrait  of  William  Hamilton,  of 
Woodlands,  and  his  niece,  Ann  Hamilton  Lyle.  It 
is  in  many  respects  the  most  beautiful  canvas  of  the 
painter’s  in  Philadelphia,  containing  more  quality 
than  he  usually  gets,  and  at  the  same  time  is  quite 
free  from  the  dryness  of  his  historical  pictures. 

The  interest  and  quality  in  the  picture  may  come 
from  the  fact  that  West  repainted  it  — all  but  the 
faces  — in  1810,  about  twenty  years  after  it  was 
first  painted.  This  information  comes  from  a letter 
from  West  to  Robert  Barclay,  dated  London,  Sept. 
5,  1810.1  His  price  for  the  picture  was  not  to  be 
augmented  because  of  the  additional  painting  and 
enrichments,  but  was  to  be  “ the  same  as  I had  for 
whole  length  Portraits  when  the  picture  was  begun 
— which  was  sixty  guineas  a figure  for  whole 
lengths.” 

The  effect  of  light  in  the  picture  is  quite  Rem- 
brandtesque.  The  figure  of  Mrs.  Lyle,  gowned  in 
white  and  partially  enveloped  in  a flowing  yellow 

1 Vide  “ Unpublished  Letters  of  West,  ” edited  by  Charles  Henry 
Hart.  Pennsylvania  Magazine.  January,  1908. 


346  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  ffine  Brts 


cloak,  stands  in  full  light,  her  two  hands  upon  the 
sleeve  of  her  uncle’s  coat,  while  Hamilton,  soberly- 
clad  in  black  leans  upon  a cabinet  or  table  covered 
with  a red  cloth,  and  looks  out  not  too  happily  upon 
the  spectator.  Behind  them  is  a window  heavily- 
draped  in  red  curtains,  through  which  may  be  seen 
a very  handsome  bit  of  night  landscape  — trees, 
water  and  a clouded  sky  effulgent  with  the  light  of 
the  obscured  moon.  The  composition  of  the  pic- 
ture is  unusual  and  distinguished,  the  colour  excep- 
tionally lovely,  but  the  canvas  shows  evidence  of 
some  accidents  and  is  in  bad  repair. 

William  Hamilton  was  a man  of  great  wealth 
and  an  eminent  botanist.  He  was  supposed  to  have 
espoused  the  cause  of  Great  Britain  against  the 
Colonies  and  was  tried  for  treason  at  Philadelphia, 
but  was  acquitted.  Hamilton  owned  the  land  upon 
which  the  city  of  Lancaster  was  built  and  his  resi- 
dence, or  country  seat,  was  built  upon  a high  spot 
of  ground  overlooking  the  Schuylkill.  The  house 
still  stands  in  what  is  known  as  Woodlands 
Cemetery,  which  takes  its  name  from  the  Ham- 
ilton estate.  In  this  house  Hamilton  died  in 
1824. 

Two  signed  studies  of  George  III  and  Queen 
Charlotte,  done  in  little,  complete  the  West  collec- 
tion in  the  Historical  Society,  which  preserves  also 
a small  study  for  Sir  Thomas  Lawrence’s  full-length 


Copyright  1902  by  C.  S.  Bradford.  Copyright  1002  by  C.  S.  Bradford. 

PORTRAITS  OF  MR.  AND  MRS.  JOSEPH  HOPKINSON. 
By  Gilbert  Stuart. 


Ube  Dlstorlcal  Society  of  Pennsylvania  347 


portrait  of  the  painter,  so  well  known  in  engraving. 
The  “ Penn’s  Treaty,”  by  West,  is  a replica. 

Of  the  collections  of  family  portraits  in  the  Soci- 
ety none  is  more  interesting  and  important  than  that 
deposited  by  Mrs.  Oliver  Hopkinson,  which  in- 
cludes beside  West’s  portrait  of  the  wife  of  the 
founder  of  the  Hopkinson  family  in  this  country 
already  mentioned,  portraits  of  Francis  Hopkinson 
by  Pine;  Mrs.  Francis  Hopkinson,  by  Peale;  Par- 
son Duche  and  his  wife  (Elizabeth  Hopkinson)  and 
Parson  Duche  and  his  son,  by  Thomas  Spence 
Duche;  a beautiful  unidentified  portrait  of  Dr.  Mor- 
gan and  two  famous  portraits  by  Gilbert  Stuart  of 
Joseph  Hopkinson  and  his  wife,  Emily  Mifflin. 

The  two  latter  constitute  all  that  the  Society  has 
to  show  from  the  brush  of  Stuart,  except  the  replica 
of  the  Athenaeum  portrait  of  Washington,  pre- 
sented by  Francis  Rawle  Wharton,  and  considered 
one  of  the  best  repetitions  of  this  type  in  existence. 

The  portraits  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Joseph  Hopkinson 
belong  to  Stuart’s  best  period  and  were  painted 
toward  the  close  of  his  residence  in  Philadelphia, 
in  1803.  Both  are  signed  on  the  back  with  the  date. 
The  portraits  were  painted  nine  years  after  their 
marriage,  in  1794,  and  show  Joseph  Hopkinson,  at 
the  age  of  thirty-three,  and  his  wife  as  a young 
and  charming  woman.  Hopkinson,  who  is  of  course 
the  second  president  of  The  Pennsylvania  Academy, 


348  pennssltmnia  Bcafcems  of  fine  Brts 


the  author  of  “ Hail  Columbia,”  so  much  alluded  to 
in  early  chapters  of  this  book,  and  whose  portrait  as 
an  old  man  we  have  studied  in  the  bust  of  Clevenger, 
is  here  presented  as  he  appeared  in  the  early  days 
of  his  famous  career  as  a lawyer,  before  he  arrived 
at  the  dignity  of  Judge.  The  pose  is  distinguished, 
the  character  full  of  vigour  and  personality  and  the 
colour  fresh  — in  short  it  is  Stuart  at  his  best. 

Mrs.  Hopkinson  is  shown  seated  before  a table, 
with  a crayon  in  the  right  hand,  in  the  act  of  draw- 
ing. An  interesting  feature  of  the  picture  is  a sil- 
houette of  the  artist  on  a paper  sliding  from  the 
table,  in  the  lower  left  hand  corner  of  the  picture. 
Both  portraits  are  painted  on  panels  twenty-four  by 
twenty-nine  and  were  of  course  companion  pieces. 
They  came  down  through  their  daughter,  Mrs. 
William  Biddle. 

Mrs.  Joseph  Hopkinson  was  a daughter  of  Gov- 
ernor Thomas  Mifflin,  whose  portrait  as  a boy  and 
again  with  his  wife,  both  by  Copley,  hang  on  an- 
other wall  of  the  Institution. 

A famous  portrait  is  that  of  Francis  Hopkinson, 
father  of  Joseph,  the  signer  of  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  a half-length  seated  at  a table  writing, 
and  said  to  be  the  first  portrait  painted  by  Robert 
Edge  Pine  on  his  arrival  in  this  country.  It  was 
done  in  1785  and  is  well  known  through  engravings 
of  the  picture  by  Heath  and  Longacre.  A copy  of 


PORTRAIT  OF  FRANCIS  HOrKINSON.  PORTRAIT  OF  MRS.  FRANCIS  HOPKINSON. 

By  Robert  Edge  Pine.  By  Charles  Willson  Peale. 


Ubc  historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania  349 


the  painting  in  pastel  made  by  Francis  Hopkinson 
himself  is  the  property  of  the  Society  and  an  amu- 
sing relic. 

Mrs.  Francis  Hopkinson,  wife  of  the  above,  done 
by  Charles  Willson  Peale,  is  a distinguished  example 
of  this  artist.  The  sitter  was  Ann  Borden. 

Thomas  Spence  Duche,  a young  artist  who  died 
before  he  had  had  time  to  show  the  full  force  of  his 
undoubted  ability,  is  represented  in  the  Hopkinson 
Collection  by  two  important  works.  These  are  half- 
length  portraits  of  his  father  and  mother,  and  of 
himself  and  his  father  on  a smaller  canvas. 

The  subject  of  the  first  picture,  the  Reverend 
Jacob  Duche,  D.  D.,  was  that  curious  character  of 
Revolutionary  times  whose  regrettable  letter  to 
Washington,  written  in  terror  at  the  time  that  the 
British  took  possession  of  Philadelphia,  urging  him 
to  “ abandon  a forlorn  hope  and  to  represent  to 
Congress  the  indispensable  necessity  of  rescinding 
the  hasty  and  ill-advised  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence,” brought  upon  him  the  obloquy  of  the  whole 
nation  and  resulted  in  his  banishment  from  the  coun- 
try as  a traitor. 

Outside  the  wall  of  St.  Peter’s  Church  Yard  is  a 
marble  tablet  in  memory  of  this  amiable  and  accom- 
plished man  whose  whole  life  was  clouded  by  an 
error.  He  was  the  first  chaplain  of  Congress  and 
in  1775  succeeded  Dr.  Peters  as  the  rector  of  Christ 


1 


350  t>enn8£h>ania  Bcabems  of  fftne  Brts 


Church.  He  devoted  his  stipend  to  the  relief  of  the 
families  whose  sons  had  fallen  in  battle. 

Parson  Duche’s  wife,  who  figures  in  the  picture 
wearing  a cap  and  looking  over  her  husband’s 
shoulder,  was  Elizabeth  Hopkinson,  a daughter  of 
Thomas  and  sister  of  Francis. 

The  second  picture  is  a small  canvas,  18  x 18,  of 
Jacob  Duche  and  his  son,  less  interesting  than  the 
first  one.  In  both  the  young  artist,  who  died  in  his 
twenty-seventh  year,  shows  pronounced  ability.  He 
was  a student  of  Benjamin  West,  who  had  been  a 
schoolmate  of  his  father.  His  best  known  work, 
a portrait  of  Bishop  Seabury,  now  at  Washington 
College,  Hartford,  Connecticut,  is  dedicated  to 
West  by  his  friend  and  pupil.  The  picture  is  well 
known  through  the  engraving  by  Sharp. 

An  excellent  portrait  of  John  Morgan,  M.  D.,  the 
founder  of  the  school  of  medicine  in  the  United 
States,  is  anonymous.  A second  portrait  of  Dr. 
Morgan,  by  Angelica  Kauffman,  painted  when  he 
was  a much  younger  man  exists,  preserved  by  col- 
lateral relatives  of  his  wife,  Mary  Hgpkinson,  sister 
of  Francis,  in  Baltimore.  Of  the  authorshfp  of  this 
portrait  in  the  Historical  Society  nothing  is  known, 
though  the  canvas  is  a very  fine  one,  showing  the 
sitter  as  an  old  man,  with  a curled  wig,  his  hand 
holding  a pair  of  old-fashioned  spectacles  and  rest- 
ing upon  an  open  book.  Dr.  Morgan  was  born  in 


Ube  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania  351 


Philadelphia  in  1735,  graduated  in  medicine  in  Edin- 
borough  in  1763,  was  professor  in  theory  and  prac- 
tice of  medicine  in  the  University  in  1765,  physician 
to  the  Pennsylvania  Hospital,  1773-1783,  director- 
general  and  physician-in-chief  of  the  General  Hos- 
pital of  the  Army,  1775-1777,  and  one  of  the 
founders  of  the  College  of  Physicians.  He  died  in 

1789- 

The  Historical  Society  boasts  two  excellent  works 
by  one  of  the  earliest  American  portrait  painters, 
John  Singleton  Copley  (1737-1815).  One  is  an 
early  work  said  to  be  a portrait  of  Thomas  Mifflin 
as  a boy.  It  comes  as  the  bequest  of  William  Mifflin, 
a descendant,  and  was  received  from  Mrs.  James 
Mifflin  on  April  2,  1910. 

The  canvas  has  not  been  through  the  hands  of  a 
restorer  and  thus  far  no  marks  or  signature  have 
been  discovered.  The  picture  appears  to  be  an  orig- 
inal work  of  Copley  at  an  early  period  and  is  in  all 
respects  a worthy  example  and  an  extremely  valu- 
able work  of  art.  The  boy  is  presented  standing 
at  three-quarter  length,  resting  one  hand  on  his  hip 
and  the  other  on  his  gun.  Further  evidence  of  the 
sporting  nature  of  the  sitter  is  in  the  brace  of  ducks 
lying  on  what  appears  to  be  the  banks  of  a river 
and  a bird  dog  swimming  in  the  water  beyond. 

Now  Thomas  Mifflin,  whom  the  heirs  claim  was 
the  original  of  the  portrait,  was  born  in  Philadelphia 


352  Pennsylvania  Bcabemy  of  jftne  Bets 


in  1744,  of  Quaker  parentage,  two  facts  that  must 
be  remembered  in  an  attempt  to  verify  the  portrait. 
He  appears  in  the  picture  to  be  a lad  of  not  more 
than  fifteen  years,  so  that  Copley,  who  was  born  in 
1737  and  was  in  consequence  but  seven  years  his 
senior,  must  have  painted  this  portrait  when  he  was 
only  twenty-two  years  of  age,  or  about  a year  beifore 
he  sent  his  “ Boy  and  the  Flying  Squirrel  ” over  to 
England  for  a criticism  from  West,  and  which  was 
his  first  picture  to  bring  him  into  prominence.  This 
seems  hardly  probable,  but  the  facts  must  speak  for 
themselves.  Though  an  early  work  the  picture 
seems  to  have  been  painted  by  a more  experienced 
hand  than  was  Copley’s  at  twenty-two.  It  has  also 
very  pertinently  been  inquired  whether  the  costume 
worn  by  the  boy  in  this  picture  would  have  been  in 
accordance  with  the  strict  Quaker  form  of  Thomas 
Mifflin’s  family.  He  wears  a blue  suit  and  a ruffled 
shirt. 

For  the  rest  the  portrait  is  charming,  the  boy 
a fresh-faced  child  with  a serene  outlook  at  life, 
and  the  painting  reserved,  full  of  character,  well 
drawn,  and  the  tone  is  a delicate  harmony. 

The  second  portrait  is  said  to  be  of  Governor 
Thomas  Mifflin  and  his  wife  Sarah  Morris.  It 
comes  from  the  other  side  of  the  house  as  the  be- 
quest of  Mrs.  Esther  F.  Wistar,  who  left  it  to  the 
Society  in  the  name  of  Dr.  Mifflin  Wistar.  It  was 


PORTRAIT  OF  GOVERNOR  THOMAS  MIFFLIN  AND  HIS  WIFE 
SARAH  MORRIS. 

By  John  Singleton  Copley. 


Ube  Ibistorical  Society  of  Pennsylvania  353 


received  on  May  23,  1900.  There  is  some  doubt  also 
as  to  the  identity  of  this  portrait,  since  it  bears  not 
the  slightest  resemblance  to  the  well  known  portrait 
of  Governor  Mifflin,  by  Gilbert  Stuart,  owned  by 
Alexander  J.  Dallas  Dixon  of  Philadelphia,  and  of 
which  the  Society  preserves  an  excellent  copy. 

The  canvas  however  appears  to  be  an  undoubted 
Copley  and  is  of  his  very  best  period.  It  pictures 
a thin,  angular  type  of  man,  smooth  shaven  and 
with  thin  powdered  straight  hair.  He  is  dressed 
very  correctly  in  grey  with  spotless  linen  and  is 
seated  by  the  side  of  his  wife,  holding  his  forefinger 
between  the  pages  of  a book  and  pointing  it  at  her 
with  a curious  expression  on  his  face.  Mrs.  Mifflin 
meanwhile  sits  looking  out  at  the  spectator,  her 
hands  employed  in  the  making  of  some  white  fringe 
upon  a mahogany  frame.  She  wears  a fine  muslin 
cap  over  her  neatly  brushed  dark  hair.  There  is  a 
monotony  in  the  colour  but  the  drawing  is  marvel- 
lous and  the  finish  superb. 

Copley,  the  artist,  was  born  in  Boston  at  a time 
when  that  city  was  a small  provincial  town  where 
art  was  unknown  and  good  instruction  was  un- 
attainable. He  is  commonly  said  to  have  been  self- 
taught  but  probably  received  some  instruction  from 
his  stepfather,  Peter  Pelham,  who  died  however 
when  Copley  was  fourteen.  In  1760,  biographers 
tell  us,  he  painted  his  “ Boy  with  the  Flying  Squir- 


354  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  o t jftne  arts 


rel,”  which  he  sent  anonymously  to  London  to  Ben- 
jamin West,  who  thought  it  so  good  that  he  had  it 
exhibited  at  Somerset  House.  In  1767,  on  West’s 
nomination,  Copley  was  elected  a fellow  of  the  So- 
ciety of  Artists  of  Great  Britain.  Two  years  later 
he  married  Susannah  Clarke  and  the  first  years  of 
their  married  life  were  passed  in  Boston  in  a soli- 
tary house  on  Beacon  Hill,  where  four  children  were 
born  to  them  including  the  son,  Lord  Lyndhurst, 
who  afterwards  became  Lord  Chancellor  of  Eng- 
land. 

In  1774  Copley  sailed  for  England,  where,  after 
a short  tour  of  Italy,  he  settled  permanently  and 
resided  until  his  death.  He  was  patronized  by  the 
Royal  family  and  the  nobility  of  England  and  in 
1779  was  made  a full  member  of  the  Royal  Acad- 
emy. Though  essentially  a portrait  painter,  he 
made  some  large  historical  pictures,  of  which  three, 
“ The  Death  of  Chatham,”  “ The  Death  of  Major 
Pierson,”  and  “ The  Siege  of  Gibraltar,”  are  in  the 
National  Gallery,  London.  Many  important  por- 
traits and  sketches,  including  his  last  portrait  of 
himself,  were  destroyed  by  the  great  fire  at  Boston 
in  1872. 

Included  in  the  collections  of  the  Historical  Soci- 
ety are  several  canvases  by  John  Neagle,  of  which 
the  most  interesting  is  the  portrait  of  Gilbert  Stuart, 
presented  by  Charles  Roberts  in  1898. 


ZLbe  Ibistodcai  Society  o t Pennsylvania  355 


Neagle  painted  two  portraits  of  Stuart,  to  which 
he  refers  in  his  manuscript  notes.  The  stronger  of 
the  two  is  the  first  one,  which  belongs  to  the  Boston 
Athenaeum  — the  second  is  a replica  of  the  first, 
for  the  completion  of  which,  however,  Stuart  sat, 
as  recorded  by  Neagle:  “That  he  (Stuart)  should 
have  honoured  me,  an  humble  artist  and  a stranger 
— by  not  only  sitting  for  one  portrait  entire  but  by 
sitting  for  the  completion  of  a copy,  is  singular. 
My  portrait  is  the  last  one  ever  painted  of  this  dis- 
tinguished artist.  I presented  it  to  Mr.  Stuart’s 
friend,  Isaac  P.  Davis,  Esq.” 

The  replica  is  the  one  owned  by  the  Society.  The 
painting  is  extremely  good,  though  done  when 
Neagle  was  twenty-nine  years  of  age.  Stuart  was 
seventy  and  was  suffering  from  paralysis,  on  which 
account  he  advised  Neagle  to  put  the  withered  side 
of  the  face  farthest  from  the  eye.  That  Neagle 
profited  greatly  from  the  elder  painter’s  teaching  is 
evident  and  his  intercourse  (as  recorded)  during 
the  progress  of  the  painting  shows  a very  pleasant 
relation  between  the  two. 

This  was  in  the  summer  of  1825,  three  years  be- 
fore Stuart’s  death.  On  the  back  of  the  canvas  is 
one  of  Neagle’s  careful  inscriptions,  which  reads  as 
follows : “ Gilbert  C.  Stuart,  Artist.  Painted  by 
John  Neagle  at  Boston,  Mass.  1825,”  and  below 
in  the  hand  of  the  restorer:  “This  inscription  is  a 


356  Pennsylvania  Hca&emy  of  fftne  Bets 


copy  from  the  original  canvas.  T.  B.  Wilkin- 
son.” 

Three  interesting  sketches  of  Indians  painted 
from  life  by  Neagle  in  1821  were  presented  by  him 
to  the  Society  in  1861.  The  first  is: 

The  Knife  Chief  of  the  Pawnee  Loups  called 
“ The  Bravest  of  the  Braves.”  He  belonged  to  a 
band  of  men  called  Braves  and  he  rescued  a woman 
of  the  Paduca  Nation  who  was  taken  prisoner  by 
his  nation  and  placed  at  the  stake  to  be  burnt  in  the 
presence  of  a council  of  the  nation.  The  Brave 
stood  looking  on  until  he  could  bear  it  no  longer. 
He  sprang  for  her,  rescued  her,  cut  the  fastenings 
that  bound  her  with  his  knife  and  flung  her  on  a 
horse  and  rode  away  with  her.  The  act  was  so 
daring  that  it  was  thought  to  be  the  work  of  the 
Great  Spirit  and  for  this  he  received  his  title,  “ The 
Bravest  of  the  Braves.” 

The  second  canvas  contains  two  heads.  To  the 
left  is  Big  Kansas  or  Caussetongua  and  to  the  right 
Sharitarische,  chief  of  the  Grand  Pawnees.  Big 
Kansas  wears  a sleepy  expression  and  was  inani- 
mate except  on  important  occasions  but  a dreadful 
opponent.  He  had  a great  friendship  for  Shari- 
tarische and  would  not  sit  for  his  likeness  unless 
both  were  placed  on  the  same  canvas.  The  other 
Chief  of  the  Grand  Pawnees  was  distinguished  in 
war  against  the  Spaniards  and  Indians  on  the  con- 


Ube  Historical  Society  ot  ipennsglvmnla  357 


fines  of  New  Mexico.  These  Indians  came  as  a 
deputation  with  Major  O’Fallon  in  1821.  Both 
canvases  are  inscribed  on  the  face  in  Neagle’s  own 
hand. 

One  of  the  finest  of  the  many  replicas  of  the 
Stuart  Athenaeum  portrait  of  Washington  is  that 
presented  to  the  Historical  Society  by  Francis 
Rawle  Wharton  in  1903. 

Charles  Willson  Peale  is  generously  represented. 
There  is  an  excellent  portrait  of  Benjamin  Frank- 
lin, another  of  Washington  that  is  well  worthy  of 
consideration,  and  several  others. 

The  portrait  of  Franklin  is  well  known  through 
engravings  and  copies  and  is  one  of  the  most  in- 
teresting canvases  that  is  preserved  of  Peale’s  pro- 
lific brush.  The  colour  while  artificial  is  decidedly 
agreeable  and  as  a portrait  nothing  could  be  more 
carefully  accurate,  nothing  more  characteristic  of 
the  pedantic  personality  of  the  doctor  nor  of  the 
attitude  of  the  painter  toward  his  art  than  this 
curious  canvas. 

A portrait  of  Anthony  Wayne,  painted  in  the 
year  that  he  died  by  Henry  Elouis  (1755-1840), 
a French  painter  who  emigrated  to  America  at 
the  beginning  of  the  French  Revolution,  and  re- 
sided some  years  in  Philadelphia,  was  presented  to 
the  Society  in  1910,  by  Mrs.  Joseph  W.  Drexel. 

The  picture  was  discovered  in  a deplorable  con- 


358  iPennsslxmnia  Bcafcems  of  fine  Brts 


dition  in  Washington,  D.  C.,  by  Mr.  Charles  Henry 
Hart,  who  has  recently  issued  a pamphlet,  in  an 
edition  of  fifty  copies  reprinted  from  The  Penn- 
sylvania Magazine  of  History  and  Biography  for 
July,  1911,  in  which  he  describes  in  an  interesting 
manner  the  identification  of  the  picture  as  an  orig- 
inal life  portrait  of  Wayne  by  Elouis. 

Mr.  Hart  considers  it  the  original  painting  from 
which  was  made  a rare  mezzotint,  one  of  the  only 
two  known  impressions  of  which  is  in  the  collec- 
tion of  the  Historical  Society.  This  engraving 
shows  Wayne  at  three-quarter  length,  while  the 
portrait  is  only  a bust.  This  may  be  explained  in 
one  of  two  ways,  either  the  engraving  is  an  elab- 
oration of  the  bust  portrait  or  the  canvas  has  been 
cut  down  from  a larger  size.  The  last  theory  has 
been  thought  the  most  plausible  on  account  of  the 
unusual  size  of  the  stretcher,  twenty  by  twenty- 
five,  and  because  of  some  unexplained  detail  in  the 
background  which  might  have  had  place  in  the 
painting  of  the  larger  canvas. 

The  portrait  is  important  as  the  best  likeness  of 
General  Wayne  that  exists. 

During  his  residence  in  Philadelphia,  which  was 
from  about  1792  to  1799,  Elouis  became  the  draw- 
ing master  of  Eleanor  Custis  and  painted  minia- 
tures of  her  mother  and  of  Washington.  The 
former  is  in  the  collection  of  Mrs.  Drexel,  while 


Zbc  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania  359 


the  whereabouts  of  the  portrait  of  the  president 
has  yet  to  be  discovered. 

Amongst  the  rare  canvases  is  a portrait  of  Mrs. 
Clement  Plumstead  now  thought  to  be  by  Robert 
Feke,  an  early  portrait  painter  of  Colonial  days, 
who  was  born  at  Oyster  Bay,  Long  Island,  about 
1725,  and  died  at  Barbadoes,  West  Indies,  aged 
about  forty-four.  Biographers  tell  us  that  he  ran 
away  from  home  when  a youth  and  was  carried  a 
prisoner  to  Spain,  where  he  employed  himself  in 
making  rude  paintings,  with  the  proceeds  of  which 
he  returned  home  and  settled  in  Newport  and  be- 
came a portrait  painter. 

Many  of  his  portraits  are  in  the  Bowdoin  Col- 
lege collection  and  in  that  of  the  Rhode  Island 
Historical  Society,  in  Providence.  One  of  his  best 
is  that  of  Lady  Wanton  in  the  Redwood  Library  at 
Newport. 

This  portrait,  which  came  down  through  Miss 
Helena  R.  Scheetz,  the  donor  of  the  Plumstead 
portraits  in  the  Stuart  Collection  at  the  Academy, 
was  supposed  to  have  been  by  Lely  until  dates 
proved  the  impossibility  of  that  attribution,  and  is 
now  ascribed  on  excellent  authority  to  Feke,  in 
which  case  it  must  be  the  third  wife  of  Clement 
Plumstead,  Mary  Curry,  who  is  represented.  If 
he  painted  the  portrait  from  life  Mrs.  Plumstead 
must  have  been  a remarkably  well  preserved 


360  Pennsylvania  Hcafcemy  of  jfine  arts 


woman,  for  she  was  married  to  Plumstead  between 
1720  and  1722,  and  Feke  was  not  born  it  appears 
until  1725.  Clement  Plumstead  was  three  times 
mayor  of  Philaelphia. 

A portrait  in  pastel  and  water  colour  of  Mrs. 
Benedict  Arnold  with  her  infant  son  is  one  of  the 
charming  things  preserved  by  the  Society  and 
has  an  interesting  history.  The  subject  is  of 
course,  “ Peggy  Shippen.”  The  portrait  descended 
through  the  Mcllvaine  family  and  the  tradition  of 
the  picture  as  preserved  by  them  is  pasted  on  the 
back  of  the  picture.  It  reads : 

“ Margaret  Shippen  Arnold  and  her  son  Edward 
Shippen,  taken  by  Sir  Thomas  Lawrence  at  Bath, 
England,  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  his  age,  and  sent 
to  her  father  Chief  Justice  Shippen  of  Philadel- 
phia.^ 

This  was  always  credited,  despite  the  evident 
maturity  of  the  picture,  until  Dr.  G.  C.  Williamson 
saw  it  last  December  and  pronounced  it  unques- 
tionably a Dan  Gardner,  adding  that  Pierpont 
Morgan  had  one  of  Gardner’s  attributed  to  Gains- 
borough, and  his  daughter  another  listed  under 
Reynolds,  these  three  misattributions  showing  what 
an  excellent  artist  Gardner  was. 

Daniel  Gardner  (1750-1805)  was  an  English 
portrait  painter  born  in  Kendal.  He  studied  at  the 
Royal  Academy  and  was  patronized  by  Reynolds. 


PORTRAIT  OF  MRS.  BENEDICT  ARNOLD  (PEGGY  SHIPPEN)  AND 

HER  SON. 

By  Daniel  Gardner. 


XTbe  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania  361 


His  portraits,  which  were  in  oil  and  crayons,  were 
successful  and  he  was  enabled  to  retire  early.  He 
died  in  London. 

A small  canvas  depicting  “ Congress  Voting 
Independence  ” is  the  one  relic  in  the  Historical 
Society  of  Pine’s  famous  schemes  for  a series  of 
historical  pictures  of  the  Revolution.  It  was  begun 
by  Pine  and  finished  by  Savage,  survived  the  gen- 
eral destruction  of  Pine’s  pictures  in  the  fire  of 
1803  and  was  purchased  by  Mr.  Hart  at  the  dis- 
persal of  the  Boston  Museum  in  1892. 

The  picture  is  particularly  interesting  in  that  it 
reproduces  the  Hall  of  Independence  as  it  was  at 
the  time  the  Declaration  was  adopted,  and  gives 
evidence  of  having  been  painted  within  its  very 
walls. 

The  portraits  of  Francis  Hopkinson  sitting  at 
the  president’s  table  writing,  of  Charles  Carroll  to 
the  right  of  Franklin,  talking  with  Stephen  Hop- 
kins— the  figure  to  the  extreme  right  wearing  a 
hat;  of  George  Read  between  Carroll  and  Hop- 
kinson and  of  William  Pacain,  the  centre  of  the 
standing  group  of  three  on  the  extreme  left,  talk- 
ing to  Dr.  Rush,  are  all  from  known  originals  by 
Pine.  The  parts  of  the  picture  painted  by  Savage 
are  easily  distinguishable  for  their  inferiority. 

There  are  two  excellent  examples  of  the  work  of 
Jacob  Eichholtz  in  the  collection.  These  are  por- 


362  Pennsylvania  Bcafcemy  of  fine  Brts 


traits  of  Captain  John  Nice  of  the  Revolutionary 
Army  and  of  Andrew  John  Shultz,  Governor  of 
Pennsylvania  from  1823  to  1829.  These  show 
Eichholtz  in  the  height  of  his  power  and  give  a 
much  more  interesting  aspect  of  his  art  than  the 
pictures  in  the  collections  of  the  Pennsylvania 
Academy.  A third  canvas  from  his  hand,  though 
only  a copy  of  a portrait  of  an  Inman,  is  well  worth 
looking  at  as  an  example  of  what  a copy  might  be. 
It  is  spirited  and  full  of  character.  The  subject  is 
John  Marshall,  the  eminent  jurist  and  statesman, 
and  the  original  hangs  in  the  Law  Association  of 
Philadelphia. 

Sully  is  but  indifferently  represented  by  a num- 
ber of  portraits,  none  of  them  first  class.  Amongst 
them  is  a portrait  of  himself,  one  of  Bishop  White, 
another  of  John  Vaughan  and  a replica  of  the  head 
of  the  Lafayette  in  Independence  Hall,  painted  in 
1845  for  the  Colonization  Society  and  deposited 
by  that  organization  with  the  Historical  Society 
with  a number  of  other  portraits,  virtually  the  pos- 
session of  the  Society  since  the  Colonization  So- 
ciety has  gone  out  of  existence. 

Of  Inman,  also,  there  is  nothing  of  importance, 
his  one  canvas  being  one  of  his  numerous  replicas 
of  Bishop  White,  of  which  the  original  is  owned 
by  Bishop  Doane  of  Albany,  and  that  is  very  fine. 

There  are  several  canvases  by  Rembrandt  Peale 


TTbe  Ibtstortcal  Society  of  Pennsylvania  363 


in  his  dry,  statistical  manner,  including  portraits  of 
Martha  Washington,  Edmund  Pendleton  Gaines 
and  one  of  himself. 

In  the  department  of  miniatures  are  several  in- 
teresting and  rare  exhibits.  These  include  a signed 
portrait  by  Copley,  of  Sir  John  St.  Clair,  adjutant 
general  of  Braddock’s  Army  when  defeated  near 
Monongahela  in  1775.  The  date  is  1758,  when 
Copley  was  but  nineteen  years  of  age  and  before 
he  had  had  any  foreign  influence. 

Two  miniatures  of  John  Kittera  and  his  wife 
are  good  examples  of  the  work  of  Robert  Fulton, 
the  inventor,  and  two  beautiful  ones  of  George 
and  Martha  Washington  are  by  James  Peale,  who 
excelled  in  this  branch  of  the  fine  arts.  John 
Trumbull  is  represented  by  what  is  practically  a 
miniature  on  wood,  of  Colonel  William  Jackson, 
private  secretary  of  Washington. 

John  Trumbull  (1756-1843)  was  a contempo- 
rary of  Stuart,  his  junior  by  only  six  months,  and 
his  survivor  for  fifteen  years.  They  met  in  the 
studio  of  Benjamin  West,  and  became  fast  friends, 
though  politically  their  opinions  were  sadly  at 
variance,  Trumbull  being  an  ardent  American  pa- 
triot, while  Stuart  was  a runaway  Tory.  Before 
he  was  twenty  Trumbull  had  become  a colonel  on 
Washington’s  staff.  While  in  London  studying 
with  West  he  was  arrested  for  treason  and  cast 


364  Pennsylvania  Bca&emy  ot  jflne  Brts 


in  the  tower,  but  was  eventually  liberated  on  the 
intervention  of  West  and  Copley,  who  guaranteed 
that  he  would  leave  the  kingdom. 

Without  being  technically  a miniature  painter 
Trumbull  was  chiefly  gifted  as  a painter  in  little. 
He  made  many  small  cabinets  on  panels  similar  to 
this  one  of  Colonel  William  Jackson,  of  which  a 
beautiful  collection  hangs  in  the  Yale  School  of 
Fine  Arts,  to  which  the  painter  gave  his  whole 
collection  of  paintings  for  an  annuity  of  $1,000. 

He  has  the  misfortune  to  be  known  by  his  poor- 
est works,  which  are  the  four  large  historical  pic- 
tures in  the  Capitol  at  Washington.  His  best  life- 
size  portraits  are  the  whole  length  of  George  Clin- 
ton and  a bust  of  Alexander  Hamilton. 

The  Society  possesses  also  an  unidentified  Shar- 
pies crayon. 

The  landscapes,  of  which  there  are  a number 
scattered  about  the  building,  include  Krimmell’s 
original  sketch  for  his  missing  picture  of  “ Elec- 
tion Day  at  the  State  House,”  and  also  an  excellent 
engraving  of  the  finished  picture ; “ The  Blowing 
up  of  the  Frigate  Augusta,”  an  interesting  relic 
from  Peale’s  Museum,  and  several  landscapes  and 
early  views  of  the  city  by  Thomas  Birch.  Winner 
has  contributed  two  quaint  pictures  to  the  collec- 
tion in  which  he  introduces  the  old  Mayor’s  Office 
at  Fifth  and  Chestnut  Streets,  with  the  “ Pie  Man,” 


XTbe  ibtstortcal  Society  of  Pennsylvania  365 


an  early  figure  in  our  city  streets,  and  “ Crazy 
Nora,”  a local  character  who  dressed  partly  in 
men’s  clothes  and  was  the  sport  of  the  street  gamin. 

In  the  Hopkinson  Collection  is  a very  beautiful 
“ Roman  Ruins,”  by  Antonio  Canaletto,  from  the 
Joseph  Bonaparte  Collection.  The  canvas  is  of 
striking  beauty  and  noble  composition. 

The  Royal  Arms  of  England,  admirably  painted 
on  wood,  date  from  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne. 
They  bear  the  motto,  “ Semper  Eadem,”  which 
Queen  Anne  in  1702  ordered  used.  This  symbol 
of  sovereignty  was  displayed  in  the  Provincial  Hall 
and  Court  House  that  once  stood  at  Second  and 
Market  Streets,  and  was  no  doubt  placed  there  at 
the  time  that  Queen  Anne  reigned  over  our  fore- 
fathers. It  was  presented  to  this  society  after  1844. 

A complete  catalogue  of  the  works  of  art  owned 
by  the  Historical  Society  is  in  contemplation  as 
well  as  a rehanging  of  the  pictures  according  to 
some  better  system  than  at  present,  which  will 
greatly  facilitate  the  work  of  students  and  visitors 
attracted  there  by  its  choice  possessions. 


THE  END. 


■ 


. 

. 

■ 


u $&&  jwa 


Bibliography 


PAINTERS  AND  SCULPTORS 

Armstrong,  Sir  Walter.  — Sir  Joshua  Reynolds.  (London, 
William  Heineman,  1900.) 

Berenson,  Bernhard.  — North  Italian  Painters  of  the  Re- 
naissance. (New  York,  1907.) 

The  Venetian  Painters  of  the  Renaissance.  (New  York 
G.  P.  Putnam’s  Sons,  1894.) 

Lorenzo  Lotto : An  Essay  in  Constructive  Art  Criticism. 
(New  York,  G.  P.  Putnam’s  Sons,  1895.) 

The  Florentine  Painters  of  the  Renaissance.  (New  York, 
G.  P.  Putnam’s  Sons,  1896.) 

Bryan. — Dictionary  of  Painters.  (New  York,  Macmillan, 
I9°3-) 

Crowe  and  Cavalcaselle.  — A History  of  Painting  in  North 
Italy.  (London,  John  Murray,  1871.) 

History  of  Painting  in  Italy.  (New  York,  Charles  Scrib- 
ner’s Sons,  1903.) 

Clement  and  Hutton.  — Artists  of  the  Nineteenth  Century. 
(Boston,  1880.) 

Cunningham,  Allan.  — Lives  of  British  Painters,  Sculp- 
tors and  Architects.  (London,  John  Murray,  1829.) 

Dunlap,  William.  — History  of  the  Rise  and  Progress  of  the 
Arts  of  Design  in  the  United  States.  (New  York,  1834.) 

Duret,  Theodore. — Histoire  de  J.  McN.  Whistler  et  son 
CEuvre.  (Paris,  1904.) 

Flagg,  Jared  B.  — Life  and  Letters  of  Washington  Allston. 
(New  York,  1892.) 

Fromentin,  Eugene.  — The  Old  Masters  of  Belgium  and 
Holland  (Les  Maitres  d’autrefois).  Translation  by  Mrs. 
Mary  C.  Robbins.  (Boston,  James  R.  Osgood  & Co., 
1882.) 

Galt,  John. — Life  and  Studies  of  Benjamin  West.  (Lon- 
don, 1816.) 

Griswold,  Rufus  Wilmot.  — Republican  Court. 

Hart,  Charles  Henry.  — Gilbert  Stuart’s  Portraits  of 
Women.  ( Century  Magazine.  Vols.  33  to  37.) 

367 


368 


JSibUograpbs 


Stuart’s  Lansdowne  Portrait  of  Washington.  ( Harper’s 
Monthly.  Vol.  93.) 

Original  Portraits  of  Washington.  ( Century  Magazine. 
Vols.  15,  18  and  21.) 

Matthew  Harris  Jouett,  Kentucky’s  Master  Painter.  ( Har- 
per’s Monthly.  Vol.  98.) 

A Limner  of  Colonial  Days.  (Harper’s  Weekly.  July  4, 
1896.) 

The  Earliest  Painter  in  America.  ( Harper’s  Monthly. 
March,  1898.) 

The  Story  of  a Portrait.  ( Harper’s  Weekly.  March  16, 
1896.) 

Hints  on  Portraits  and  How  to  Catalogue  Them.  (Phila- 
delphia, 1898.) 

Browere’s  Life  Masks  of  Great  Americans.  (New  York, 

1899.) 

Jackson,  Henry  E.  — Benjamin  West,  his  Life  and  Work. 

(Philadelphia,  The  John  C.  Winston  Co.,  1900.) 

Leslie,  Charles  Robert.  — Memoirs  of  John  Constable,  R.  A. 
(London,  1843.) 

Autobiographical  Recollections.  Edited  by  Tom  Taylor. 
(Boston,  i860.) 

Mason,  George  G — Life  and  Works  of  Gilbert  Stuart. 

(New  York,  Charles  Scribner’s  Sons,  1894.) 

Menpes,  Mortimer.  — Whistler,  as  I Knew  Him.  (New 
York,  Macmillan,  1904.) 

Michel,  Emile.  — Rembrandt,  sa  vie,  son  oeuvre  et  son  temps. 
(Paris,  Hachette,  1893.) 

A Translation  of  the  above  by  Florence  Simmons.  (Lon- 
don, William  Heineman,  1894.) 

Great  Masters  of  Landscape  Painting.  (Philadelphia,  J.  B. 
Lippincott,  1910.) 

Pennell,  E.  R.  and  J.  — The  Life  of  James  McNeill  Whistler. 

(Philadelphia,  J.  B.  Lippincott,  1908.) 

Sensier,  Alfred.  — La  vie  et  l’ceuvre  de  J.  F.  Millet  ( Paris, 
A.  Quantin,  1881.) 

Stanley,  George.  — Painters  of  the  Dutch  and  Flemish 
Schools.  (London,  Henry  G.  Bohn,  1855.) 

Sweeter,  M.  F.  — Life  of  Washington  Allston.  (Cambridge, 

1879) 

Taft,  Lorado.  — History  of  American  Sculpture.  (New 
York,  Macmillan,  1903.) 

Tuckerman,  Henry  T.  — Book  of  the  Artists.  (New  York, 

1867.) 

Vandyke,  John  C.  — A Text  Book  of  the  History  of  Paint- 
ing. (New  York  and  London,  Longmans,  Green  and  Co., 

1894) 


JBibUograpbg 


369 


Vasari,  Giorgio.  — Lives  of  the  Most  Eminent  Painters, 
Sculptors  and  Architects. 

ENGRAVERS,  ETC. 

Hind,  A.  M.  — A Short  History  of  Engraving  and  Etching. 
(Boston,  Houghton,  Mifflin  and  Co.,  1908.) 

Kepple,  Frederick.  — The  Golden  Age  of  Engraving.  (New 
York,  Baker  & Taylor  Co.,  1910.) 

Koehler,  Sylvester  R.  — Etching.  (Cassell  and  Co.,  Ltd., 
1885.) 

Wedmore,  Frederick.  — Fine  Prints.  (New  York,  Longmans, 
Green  & Co.,  1897.) 

CERAMICS,  ETC. 

Barber,  Edwin  AtLee.  — Maj  olica  of  Mexico.  ( Phila.,  Pa., 
Museum,  1908.) 

Lead  Glazed  Pottery.  (New  York,  Doubleday,  Page  & Co., 

1907  ■) 

Marks  of  American  Potters.  (Philadelphia,  1904.) 

Salt  Glazed  Stone  Ware.  (New  York,  Doubleday,  Page  & 
Co.,  1907.) 

Tin  Enameled  Pottery.  (New  York,  Doubleday,  Page  & 
Co.,  1907.) 

Artificial  Soft  Paste  Porcelain.  (New  York,  Doubleday, 
Page  & Co.,  1907.) 

Tulip  Ware  of  the  Pennsylvania  German  Potters. 

Pottery  and  Porcelain  of  the  United  States. 

Anglo-American  Pottery. 

American  Glassware  Old  and  New. 

Bushell,  Stephen  W.,  and  William  M.  Laffan.  — Cata- 
logue of  the  Morgan  Collection  of  Chinese  Porcelains. 
(New  York,  Metropolitan  Museum,  1907.) 

Chaffers,  William.  — Handbook  of  Marks  and  Monograms 
on  Pottery  and  Porcelains.  (London,  Reeves  & Turner, 
1901.) 

Dillon,  Edward.  — Glass.  (New  York,  G.  P.  Putnam’s  Sons, 
1907.) 

Dunlop,  M.  A.  Wallace.  — Glass  in  the  Old  World.  (Lon- 
don, Field  & Tuer.) 

Earle,  Alice  Morse.  — China  Collecting  in  America.  (New 
York,  Charles  Scribner’s  Sons,  1892.) 

Fowice,  Frank  Rede.  — The  Bayeux  Tapestry.  (London, 
George  Bell  & Sons,  1898.) 

Halsey,  R.  T.  Haines.  — Pictures  of  Early  New  York  on 
Dark  Blue  Staffordshire  Pottery.  (New  York,  Dodd, 
Mead  & Co.,  1898.) 


370 


SSibliogcapbs 


Havard,  Henry. — Les  Arts  de  l’Ameublement : La  Cera- 
mique.  (Paris,  Charles  Delagrave.) 

Hodgson,  Mrs.  Willoughby.  — How  to  Identify  Old  Chinese 
Porcelain.  (Chicago,  A.  C.  McClurg  & Co.,  1907.) 

How  to  Identify  Old  China.  (London,  George  Bell  & Sons, 
1904.) 

Hooper,  W.  H.  and  W.  C.  Phillips.  — A Manual  of  Marks 
on  Pottery  and  Porcelain.  (New  York,  Macmillan,  1900.) 

Jacquemart,  A.  — Les  Merveilles  de  la  Ceramique.  (Paris, 
Hachette,  1866.) 

Jourdain,  M.  — Old  Lace : A Handbook  for  Collectors. 

(New  York,  Charles  Scribner’s  Sons,  1909.) 

Litchfield,  Frederick.  — How  to  Collect  Old  Furniture. 
(London,  George  Bell  & Sons,  1904.) 

Lockwood,  Luke  Vincent.  — The  Pendleton  Collection. 
(Rhode  Island  School  of  Design,  1904.) 

Colonial  Furniture  in  America.  (New  York,  Charles 
Scribner’s  Sons,  1901.) 

Marryat,  Joseph.  — Pottery  and  Porcelain.  (London,  John 
Murray,  1857.) 

Monkhouse,  Cosmo.  — Chinese  Porcelain.  (New  York,  Cas- 
sell & Co.,  Ltd.) 

Moore,  N.  Hudson. — 'The  Old  China  Book.  (New  York, 
A.  Stokes  & Sons,  1903.) 

Palliser,  Mrs.  Bury.  — History  of  Lace.  (London,  Samp- 
son, Low,  Marston  & Co.,  Ltd.,  1902.) 

P’ien,  Hsaing  Yuan.  — Chinese  Porcelain.  Translated  and 
annotated  by  Stephen  W.  Bushell,  C.  M.  G.,  M.  D.,  Ox- 
ford. (Clarendon  Press,  1908.) 

Pollen,  Mrs.  John  Hungerford.  — Seven  Centuries  of  Lace. 
(New  York,  Macmillan,  1908.) 

Prime,  William  C.  — Pottery  and  Porcelain.  (New  York, 
Harpers,  1878.) 

Solon,  L.  M.  — The  Art  of  the  Old  English  Potter.  (New 
York,  Appleton,  1886.) 

A Brief  History  of  Old  English  Porcelain.  (London, 
Bemrose  Sons,  Ltd.,  1903*) 

Old  French  Faience.  (Cassell  & Co.,  Ltd.,  i9°3-) 

History  and  Description  of  Italian  Majolica.  (Cassell  & 

Walters,  H.  B.  — History  of  Ancient  Pottery.  (New  York, 
Charles  Scribner’s  Sons,  1905.) 

Winston,  the  late  Charles.  — Memoirs  Illustrative  ot  the 
Art  of  Glass  Painting.  (London,  John  Murray,  1865O 

Van  de  Put,  A.  — Hispano-Moresque  Ware  of  the  XV  Cen- 
tury. (London,  Chapman  & Hall,  Ltd.,  1904-) 


Unbei 


Adam  brothers,  281. 

Adams,  John,  96,  316,  318. 
Adams,  John  Quincey,  321. 
Agnew,  Dr.  D.  Hayes,  136. 
Alexander,  Cosmo,  73. 
Alexander,  John  W.,  312. 
Allen,  William,  40,  329,  330, 
33i. 

Allston,  Washington,  49,  56, 
57,  58,  126,  199,  202. 
Ancora,  Peter,  114. 

Angelico,  Fra  (Giovanni  da 
Fiesole),  see  Fiesole. 

Anne,  Queen,  365. 

Anshutz,  Thomas  P.,  136, 

137- 

Anthony,  Joseph,  43,  96. 
Appleton,  Thomas  G.,  216. 
Armstrong,  General  John,  10, 
14. 

Armstrong,  W.  G.,  108. 
Arnold,  Mrs.  Benedict,  360. 
Audubon,  John  James,  70. 
Avery,  Samuel  P.,  83,  127. 

Bache,  Richard,  14. 

Baird,  Matthew,  19. 

Baker,  Sir  Henry  Lorraine, 
95,  96. 

Baldems,  Jan,  290. 

Baldwin,  L.,  87. 

Banks,  Sir  Joseph,  16. 
Bannister,  Mr.  and  Mrs.,  73. 
Barber,  Edwin  AtLee,  viii, 
224,  226,  227,  228,  233, 


242.  250,  251,  252,  257,  263, 
286,  288,  291. 

Barbison  School,  173,  175, 

299,  302. 

Barclay,  Robert,  345. 

Barlow,  Joel,  191,  192. 

Barry,  James,  56. 
Bashkirtseff,  Marie,  307. 
Bastien-Lepage,  Jules,  307. 
Bayard,  Andw.,  6. 

Bayeux  Tapestry,  280. 

Beach,  Ralph  Bagnall,  240. 
Beaux,  Cecilia,  138. 

Beck,  Paul,  17,  89,  162. 
Beckett,  Henry,  32 7. 

Bellows,  George,  144. 
Belmont,  220. 

Bennett,  E.  and  W.,  241. 
Bennett,  James,  240. 

Bergey,  Benjamin,  232. 

Bernal  Collection,  288. 
Bernardo,  243. 

Biddle,  Charles,  6. 

Biddle,  Nicholas,  10,  11,  121. 
Biddle,  Mrs.  William,  348. 
Biddle,  W.  S.,  6. 

Big  Kansas,  356. 

Bingham,  William,  17,  81,  83, 

84,  85,  87,  88,  219. 
Bingham,  Mrs.  William,  80, 

85. 

Binney,  Horace,  6,  57. 

Birch,  Thomas,  15,  238,  239, 

364. 

Birckhead,  Pollard  E.,  117. 


372 


fn&ei 


Blanchard,  Misses,  169. 

Blodgett,  Mrs.  Samuel,  80, 
98,  99,  100,  103. 

Bloomfield-Moore  Collection, 
224,  263,  265,  266,  267,  269, 
270,  280. 

Bloomfield-Moore,  Mrs.  152, 
223. 

Boldini,  Jean,  186. 

Bonaparte,  Joseph,  Collec- 
tion, 17,  18,  160,  273,  365. 

Bonheur,  Auguste,  179,  180. 

Bonheur,  Rosa,  179,  180. 

Bonnin  and  Morris,  240. 

Borden,  Ann,  see  Mrs.  Fran- 
cis Hopkinson. 

Bordley,  Elizabeth  Beale,  99, 
100. 

Bordley,  John  Beale,  100. 

Bosschsert,  Nicholas,  151. 

Bossuet,  84. 

Both,  Jan,  300. 

Botticelli,  135. 

Boudin,  Eugene,  186. 

Bowen,  Daniel,  324. 

Bouguereau,  Wm.  Adolphe, 
164,  204. 

Boydell,  77. 

Bracquemond,  174. 

Braddock,  General,  363. 

Bradford  and  Inskeep,  124, 

125. 

Bradford,  Thomas,  Jr.,  6. 

Bravest  of  the  Braves,  356. 

Breck,  Samuel,  220. 

Breckenridge,  Hugh  H.,  205. 

Breton,  Jules,  174,  307. 

Breughel,  Pieter,  152,  310, 
3II-. 

Bronzino,  310. 

Browere,  John  H.  I.,  333. 

Brown,  David  Paul,  in. 

Brown,  Peter  A.,  6. 

Browne,  Dr.,  319. 

Brush,  George  de  Forrest, 
I3S 

Burd,  Charles,  237. 


Burd,  Edward,  6. 

Burney,  Fanny,  45. 

Burr,  Aaron,  318. 

Byron,  Lord,  169. 

Caesar  Borgia,  167. 

Calame,  Alexandre,  166. 
Calder,  A.  M.,  207. 

Calder,  Alex.  Stirling,  203, 
206,  207,  208. 

Caliari,  Paolo,  156,  157,  176. 
Campbell,  Ferdinand  Stew- 
art, 101. 

Campbell,  Lady  Archibald, 
296,  297. 

Canaletto,  Antonio,  365. 
Canova,  10,  192,  200. 

Capo  di  Monte,  287,  288. 
Caravaggio,  156,  159. 

Carbo,  Mariano  Fortuny  y, 
182. 

Carey,  Edward  L.,  7,  24,  109. 
Carey,  Henry  C.,  126. 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  59. 
Carnarvon,  Henry,  Earl  of, 
76. 

Carr,  James,  239. 

Carracci,  Annibale,  153,  154. 
Carracci,  Ludovico,  153. 
Carroll,  Charles,  361. 

Cazin,  Jean  Charles,  178. 
Centennial  Exhibition,  27,  28, 
87,  219,  220,  239,  263,  267, 
293,  318. 

Ceracchi,  Giuseppe,  2,  10,  192, 
193- 

Ceres,  188. 

Cerezo,  Mateo,  156. 

Chalmers,  Thomas,  no. 
Chandron,  Simon,  193. 
Channing.  Dr.,  57. 

Channing,  William  F.  83. 
Channing,  Mrs.,  83. 

Chapu,  Henri,  204. 

Charles  I,  339. 

Charles  II,  261,  262,  339. 
Charles  V,  260. 


•ffit&et 


373 


Charlotte,  Queen,  345. 

Chase,  William  M.,  130-131, 
132,  30S,  3i i- 
Chatham,  Earl  of,  65. 
Chauncey,  Chs.,  6. 

Cheney,  John,  99,  109. 
Chia-Ch’ing,  264,  270. 
Ch’ien-lung,  264,  265,  267, 

268,  270. 

Childs,  Cephas  G.,  no,  112. 
Ch’ing  Dynasty,  264. 

Ching  T’ai,  271. 
Ching-te-chen,  266. 
Chlapowski,  Helena  Mod- 
jeska,  165. 

Chretien,  325. 

Claghorne  Collection,  217. 
Claghome,  James  L.,  7,  19, 
217. 

Clark,  Clarence  H.,  169. 
Clark,  Charles,  6. 

Clarke,  Edward  S.,  263. 
Clarke,  Susannah,  354. 
Clarkson,  Mr.,  39. 

Clay,  Henry,  1 16. 

Claypoole,  James,  v,  vi,  60. 
Cleveland,  Duke  of,  201. 
Clevenger,  Shobal  Vail,  202, 
203,  348. 

Clinton,  George,  364. 

Clinton,  DeWitt,  247. 

Clodion,  14. 

Clothier,  Isaac  H.,  147. 
Clymer,  Edwin  S.,  206. 
Clymer,  George,  6,  7,  13,  68. 
Coates,  Charlotte,  77. 

Coates,  Edward  H.,  7,  21,  22, 
147,  169,  171,  206. 

Coates,  John  R.,  6. 

Cockburn,  Admiral,  96. 
Colden,  Cadwallader,  63. 
Colomb,  Michel,  149. 
Columbianum,  vi,  1,  3. 

Condy,  J.  W.,  6. 

Constable,  John,  162,  297, 

298,  299. 

Constable,  William,  88. 


Constitution,  191. 

Converse,  John  H.,  169. 
Cooke,  George  Frederick,  17, 
106,  107,  124,  125. 

Cooper,  J.  Fennimore,  200. 
Cooper,  Thomas  Apthorpe, 

125. 

Cope,  Caleb,  7,  in. 

Cope,  Thomas  Pym,  in. 
Copley,  John  Singleton,  64, 
102,  348,  351,  353,  354,  363, 
364- 

Corot,  J.  B.  C.,  166,  173,  175. 
Correggio,  Antonio  Alle- 
gri da,  153,  154. 

Cottet,  Charles,  306. 

Courbet,  Gustave,  177,  178; 

303- 

Couture,  Thomas,  144,  146, 
166,  176. 

Coxe,  John  Redman,  5,  6. 
Coxe,  Tench,  13. 

Cramond,  Henry,  95. 
Crawford,  Wm.  Harris,  109. 
Cresson,  William  Emlen,  23. 
Croke,  Alexander,  15,  16. 
Cromwell,  Oliver,  60,  333. 
Cruikshank,  George,  75. 
Cruikshank,  Charles,  102. 
Cunningham,  Allan,  55. 
Curry,  Mary,  359. 

Custis,  Eleanor,  100,  358. 

Dagnan-Bouveret,  P.  A.  J., 
168. 

Dallas,  Alexander  James,  6, 
96. 

Dana,  Charles  E.,  276. 

Dampt,  Jean,  204. 

Darwin,  Charles,  317. 
Daubigny,  Charles  Francois, 
166,  178. 

Daumier,  Henri,  173. 

David,  Jacques  Louis,  44,  55, 
69,  160,  176,  192. 

Davis,  Charles  H.,  22,  138. 
Davis,  Isaac  P.,  87,  355- 


374 


fltt&ei 


Davy,  Mrs.  Elizabeth,  162. 
De  Camp,  Joseph,  127, 128,205. 
Decatur,  Stephen,  315. 
Delacroix,  F.  V.  E.,  303,  304. 
Demidoff,  Prince,  201. 
Denon,  Dominique  Vivant, 
55,  69. 

Detaille,  Edouard,  180,  181. 
De  Vos,  Cornelis,  310. 

De  Vos,  Simon,  310. 

Diaz  de  la  Pena,  178. 
Dickerson,  Mahlon,  6. 
Dillwyn,  William,  127. 

Dixey,  John,  193. 

Dixon,  Alexander  J.  Dallas, 
353- 

Doane,  Bishop,  362. 

Dorsey,  John,  6,  9. 

Dou,  Gerard,  151. 

Drayton,  Tom,  213. 

Drexel,  Mrs.  Joseph  W.,  208, 
357,  358. 

Drummond,  Archbishop  Rob. 
Hay,  41. 

Duche,  Jacob,  39,  347,  349, 
350. 

Duche,  Mrs.  Jacob,  347,  350. 
Duche,  Thomas  Spence,  347, 
349,  350. 

Dudley,  Earl  of,  201. 

Dugan,  Jos.,  7. 

Dunlap,  William,  74,  317. 
Dunlop,  Mr.,  126. 

Du  Ponceau,  Peter  S.,  5. 
Dupre,  Jules,  178. 

Duran,  Carolus,  131,  165. 
Dutton,  W.,  87. 

D’Yrujo,  Marchioness,  80. 

Eakins,  Thomas,  21,  135-136, 
137,  204. 

Earl,  Clayton,  115. 

Earl,  Cornelia,  116. 

Earl,  Harrison,  116,  121,  166. 
Earl,  Ralph,  78. 

Earle,  Mr.  and  Mrs.  George 
H.,  Jr.,  189. 


Eichholtz,  Jacob,  120,  121, 
361,  262. 

Elias,  Nicholas,  150. 

Elkins,  William  L.,  121,  169. 
Elouis,  Plenry,  357,  358. 
Emerson,  Ralph  Waldo,  127. 
Este,  Marquis  of,  169. 

Etting,  Reuben  and  Frances 
Gratz,  70. 

Evainetos,  189. 

Ewer,  Sam’l,  6. 

Falcone,  Aniello,  155. 
Faruffini,  Federigo,  167. 

Feke,  Robert,  359. 

Fenton,  Lyman  and,  241. 
Field,  John  W.,  26,  129. 
Field,  Mrs.  John  W.,  26,  103, 
129. 

Fielding,  Henry,  127. 

Fiesole,  Giovanni  da,  157. 
Fitch,  John,  343. 

Fleury,  Tony  Robert,  204. 
Ford,  Mrs.  John,  158. 
Fortuny  y Carbo,  Mariano, 
17 1,  182,  183,  184,  185. 
Fortuny,  Madame,  183. 
Fothergill,  Dr.  John,  77,  97, 
98. 

Fouche,  Joseph,  55. 

Fox,  Geo.,  6. 

Francia,  Giulio,  see  Raibolini. 
Franklin,  Benjamin,  10,  62, 
83,  190,  193,  320,  357,  361. 
Franklin,  Walter,  6. 

Franks,  Col.  Isaac,  95,  186. 
Fraser,  C.  W.,  6. 

Frazee,  John,  199-200,  334. 
Frazer,  Robt.,  6. 

Frederick,  Charles,  238. 
Fromentin,  Eugene,  186,  301. 
Fulton,  Robert,  8,  9,  30,  159, 
343,  363. 

Furness  and  Hewitt,  19. 
Furness,  Horace  Howard, 
127,  128. 

Furness,  Wm.  Henry,  127. 


In&ei 


375 


Gaines,  Edmund  Pendleton, 

363. 

Gainsborough,  Thomas,  75, 
76,  77,  90,  299,  360. 

Galle,  Emile,  248. 

Galt,  John,  62. 

Garesche,  T.  P.,  6. 

Gardner,  Daniel,  360,  361. 
Garrett,  T.  Harrison,  217. 
Garrick,  David,  324. 

Gastaldi,  Andre,  169. 

Gates,  Horatio,  318. 

Gatliff,  Samuel,  101. 

Gatliff,  Mrs.  Samuel,  100,  101. 
Gautier,  Theophile,  304. 
George  I,  332. 

George  II,  332. 

George  III,  36,  4B  45,  332, 
346. 

George  IV,  122. 

Gerard,  Chevalier,  314,  315, 
316. 

Gerome,  J.  L.,  168,  186. 
Gibbon,  Edward,  169. 

Gibbs,  Col.  George,  83. 

Gibbs,  Oliver  Wolcott,  97. 
Gibson,  Henry  C.,  19,  25,  26, 
95,  172,  179,  184-187. 
Gibson,  James,  6,  100. 
Gilmore,  Robert,  340. 

Gilpin,  Henry  D.,  7,  19,  127. 
Giotto  di  Bondone,  37. 
Girard,  Stephen,  106,  240. 
Gladstone,  W.  E.,  128. 
Glentworth,  Plun.  F.,  6. 
Godfrey,  Thomas,  39. 
Goodman  and  Piggott,  108. 
Gozzoli,  Benozzo,  157. 

Graff,  Frederick,  247. 

Graff,  Henrietta,  247. 

Grafly,  Charles,  204-206,  208. 
Grasbeek,  151. 

Gratz,  Simon,  6. 

Grant,  Capt.,  201. 

Grant,  William,  of  Congal- 
ton,  75,  76. 

Gray  Collection,  216. 


Gray,  Francis  Calley,  216. 

Grayson,  Peter,  119. 

Greco,  El,  see  Theotocopuli. 

Greco,  Paolo,  155. 

Greenough,  Horatio,  43,  199- 
201. 

Greenleaf,  James,  96. 

Griffin,  Elizabeth  Corbin,  see 
Mrs.  Samuel  Gatliff. 

Griffin,  Samuel,  101. 

Griswold,  Rufus  Wilmot,  103. 

Grimes,  John,  118. 

Grosvenor,  Lord,  45. 

Gross,  Dr.  Samuel  David, 
136. 

Haldeman  Paris,  165. 

Hallowell,  John,  6. 

Hals,  Franz,  150. 

Hamilton,  Alexander,  2,  193, 

318,  364- 

Hamilton,  Andrew,  328,  329. 

Hamilton,  Governor  James, 
40,  314,  327-329,  344- 

Hamilton,  John  McLure,  128. 

Hamilton,  William,  of 
Woodlands,  345,  346. 

Hammer,  William,  272. 

Harrison,  Alexander,  22,  137, 
203,  312. 

Harrison,  Charles  C.,  169. 

Harrison,  Mrs.  John,  279, 
293. 

Harrison,  Joseph,  332. 

Harrison,  Mrs.  Joseph,  36, 
66,  164,  209,  331,  332. 

Hart,  Charles  Henry,  viii,  22, 
83,  86,  87,  88,  91,  95,  100, 
107,  1 17,  120,  327,  333,  339, 
345,  358,  361. 

Hassam,  Childe,  141. 

Hastings,  Marquis  of,  21 1. 

Heath,  Thomas,  88,  348. 

Heckewelder,  John  Gottlieb 
Ernestus,  120. 

Heine,  Heinrich,  300. 

Helmuth,  Henry  K.,  5. 


376 


fn&ex 


Helmuth,  John  K.,  6. 
Hemphill,  Judge  Joseph,  235- 
237. 

Hemphill,  Tucker  and,  222, 
226,  236,  238. 

Henderson,  Eliza,  339. 
Henner,  Jean  Jacques,  186. 
Hennig,  Rudolph,  135,  136. 
Henry,  Ann,  343. 

Henry,  William,  38,  40,  342, 
343. 

Herbert,  78. 

Hermans,  Charles,  166. 
Hesselius,  Gustavus,  v,  vi, 
339-342. 

Hesselius,  John,  64,  340. 
Hesselius,  Lydia,  339. 

Hewitt,  Furness  and,  19. 

Hoe  Sale,  288. 

Hogarth,  William,  43. 
Hoguet,  Charles,  166. 
Holbein,  Hans,  278. 

Holloway,  Thos.,  83. 

Homer,  Winslow,  132-134. 
Hopfer  family,  215. 

Hopkins,  James,  6. 

Hopkins,  Stephen,  361. 
Hopkinson,  Elizabeth,  see 
Mrs.  Jacob  Duche. 
Hopkinson,  Francis,  39,  62, 
323,  324,  347-350,  361. 
Hopkinson,  Mrs.  Francis, 

347,  349- 

Hopkinson,  Joseph,  3,  4,  6,  7, 
9,  10,  15,  30,  202,  347,  348. 
Hopkinson,  Mrs.  Joseph,  347, 

348. 

Hopkinson,  Mary,  350. 
Hopkinson,  Mrs.  Oliver,  347. 
Hopkinson,  Thomas,  350. 
Hopkinson,  Mrs.  Thomas,  39, 
343,  345- 

Hoppner,  John,  122,  161,  162. 
Houdon,  Jean  Antoine,  11, 
12,  69,  189-191,  206,  316, 
335,  336. 

Hulme,  Thos.,  235,  237. 


Hulme,  Tucker  and,  235,  236. 
Hunt,  Wm.  Morris,  144-146, 
176. 

Hunt,  Wilson,  6. 

Hunter,  Dr.  William,  72. 
Hutchinson,  Chas.  Hare,  23, 
340. 

Ingersoll,  Joseph  R.,  7,  127. 
Ingres,  J.  A.  D.,  176. 

Inman,  Henry,  27,  109-112, 
362. 

Inskeep,  Bradford  and,  124, 
125. 

Irvine,  Gen’l  William,  190. 

Jackson,  Ann  Willing,  103. 
Jackson,  Mrs.  Rosalie  V. 
Tiers,  64. 

Jackson,  William,  363,  364. 
Jackson,  Mrs.  William,  103. 
Jacquemart,  264 
Jacques,  Charles,  173. 

James,  Thos.  C.,  6. 

Jameson,  George,  73. 

Jarvis,  John  Wesley,  109,  no. 
Jay,  John,  82,  198. 

Jefferson,  Thomas,  69,  96, 

190,  318. 

Jervis,  Sir  John,  77. 

Johnson,  John  G.,  295. 
Johnson,  Mary,  see  Mrs. 

Thos.  Hopkinson. 

Johnson,  Dr.  Samuel,  324. 
Jones,  John  Paul,  190. 
Jordan,  Dr.  John  Woolf, 
viii,  343- . 

Jouet,  Daniel  de,  118. 

Jouet,  Matthieu  de,  118. 
Jouett,  Matthew  Harris,  92. 
Juarez,  President,  259. 

K’ang-hsi,  264-265,  267,  270. 
Kauffman,  Angelica,  161,  350. 
Keller,  Dr.  Ferdinand,  223, 
276,  278. 

Kemble,  Fanny,  108,  109. 
Kendall,  John  Philip,  77. 


unsex 


377 


Kerr,  Walter,  6. 

Kimon,  189. 

King,  Charles  B.,  217. 

King,  Samuel,  57. 

Kittera,  John,  363. 

Kline,  Phillip,  231. 

Kneller,  Sir  Godfrey,  152, 
340. 

Koehler,  Sylvestre  R.,  212, 
215,  216. 

Koninck,  Philip,  300,  301. 
Krimmell,  John  Lewis,  15, 
33-35,  194,  364. 

Kuhl,  Henry,  6. 

Kurlbaum  and  Schwartz,  239. 


Laessle,  Albert,  203,  208,  209. 

Lafayette,  General,  190,  200, 
201,  246,  247,  314,  316,  320, 
321,  322,  335,  362. 

Laing,  David,  59, 

Lambdin,  James  Read,  127. 

Lambert,  John,  114. 

Lambinet,  Emile,  166. 

Lamborn,  Robert  H.,  272. 

Lanseer,  Sir  Edwin,  124. 

Lansdowne  Estate,  85,  86, 

219,  220,  231. 

Lansdowne,  Marquis  of,  84, 
86,  88,  126. 

Lansdowne  Portrait  of 
Washington,  17,  84-89. 

La  Touche,  Gaston,  171. 

Latrobe,  Benj.,  9,  334. 

Lawrence,  Sir  Thomas,  162, 
346,  360. 

Lawson,  Alexander,  35,  117. 

Le  Brun,  Charles,  159. 

Lee,  Richard  Henry,  316. 

Leinster,  Duke  of,  77. 

Lely,  Sir  Peter,  338,  339,  359- 

Leslie,  Chas.  Robert,  24,  123- 
127. 

Levi,  Samson,  6. 

Leviter,  Marie,  310. 

Levy,  Moses,  6. 

Lewis,  Dr.  Francis  W.,  147, 


1 66,  223,  263,  269,  271,  272, 
2 76,  277. 

Lewis,  John  Delaware,  87. 
Lewis,  John  Frederick,  viii,  7. 
Lewis,  Miss  Mary,  223,  271, 
276. 

Lewis,  W.,  6. 

Lewis,  William,  93. 

Leys,  Baron  Hendrik,  186. 
Liberi,  Pietro,  159. 

Lieb,  Michael,  see  Munkacsy. 
Lippi,  Filippino,  135. 
Lippincott,  Mrs.  J.  Dundas, 
no. 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  333. 
Lincoln,  Rebecca,  333. 
Livingston,  Chancellor  Rob- 
ert R.,  10,  314,  318. 
Longacre,  J.  B.,  348. 

Loti,  Carlo,  159. 

Louis  XIV,  315. 

Louis  XV,  161. 

Louis  Philippe,  303. 

Lough,  John  Graham,  210, 
211. 

Lowestoft,  283-286. 

Luzerne,  Chevalier  de  la,  61, 
3r5- 

Lyle,  Ann  Hamilton,  345. 
Lyman  and  Fenton,  241. 
Lyndhurst,  Lord,  354. 

Lyon,  Pat,  112-114. 

MacEwen,  Walter,  140. 
McKean,  Jos.  B.,  6. 

McLain,  John,  108. 

Macaulay,  Thos.  B.,  no. 
Maccari,  Cesare,  186. 
Macchiavelli,  167. 

Maclise,  Daniel,  162. 

Madison,  Dolly,  90,  104,  318. 
Madison,  James,  90. 

Madrazo,  183. 

Malbone,  Edward  Greene,  57. 
Manchester,  Duke  of,  77. 
Manet,  Edouard,  176,  305. 
Marsh,  George  P.,  216. 


378 


fn&ei 


Marshall,  John,  362. 

Mary,  Queen,  332. 
Masaniello,  155. 

Mason,  George  C.,  42. 
Mauritz,  Johann,  289. 
Maximilian,  260. 

Mead,  Dr.,  239. 

Meadows,  J.  Kenny,  162. 
Mease,  Dr.  James,  240. 
Meeher,  Samuel,  6. 
Meissonnier,  J.  L.  E.,  180. 
Melchers,  Gari,  139,  140. 
Menefee,  Jouett,  118. 
Menefee,  Mrs.  Sarah  B.,  119. 
Meredith,  William,  6. 

Metcalf,  Willard  L.,  140. 
Michel,  Georges,  185. 
Michetti,  Francesco  Paola, 
186. 

Mifflin,  Miss  Elizabeth,  100. 
Mifflin,  Emily,  see  Mrs. 

Joseph  Hopkinson. 

Mifflin,  Mrs.  James,  351. 
Mifflin,  Gov.  Thomas,  348, 
351,  352. 

Mifflin,  Mrs.  Thomas,  352, 
353- 

Mifflin,  William,  351. 

Miller,  Susan  Earl,  121. 
Millet,  Jean  Francois,  144, 
146,  173-175,  302. 

Milnor,  James,  6. 

Ming  Dynasty,  264,  265,  270, 
271. 

Mintzenburg,  Johan,  290. 
Modjeska,  Helena,  see  Ma- 
dame Chlapowski. 

Monet,  Claude,  147. 

Monroe,  James,  315,  318,  320, 
322. 

Moore,  Bloomfield  H.,  224. 
Moore,  Clarence  B.,  241. 
Moran,  Benj.,  322. 

Morgan,  Benj.  R.,  6. 

Morgan,  Dr.  John,  347,  350, 
35i. 

Morgan,  Pierpont,  360. 


Morland,  George,  162. 
Morris,  Bonnin  and,  240. 
Morris,  Harrison  S.,  22. 
Morris,  Henry  G.,  19. 

Morris,  John  T.,  169,  226,  239, 
248. 

Morris,  Robert,  67,  93,  103, 
no,  316,  323,  342. 

Morris,  Sarah,  see  Mrs. 

Thos.  Mifflin. 

Morse,  S.  F.  B.,  57. 
Munkacsy,  Mihaly,  185,  307, 
308. 

Munthe,  Ludvig,  166. 
Murillo,  18,  344. 


Napoleon  I,  2,  10-12,  14,  16, 
149,  160,  191,  193. 

Nase,  John,  231. 

Neagle,  Garrett  C.,  114. 

Neagle,  John,  27,  70,  92,  112- 
n 7,  354-357- 

Neesz,  Johann,  231. 

Neuville,  Alphonse  de,  180, 
181. 

Newton,  Dr.  John,  40. 

Nice,  John,  362. 

Nicholas,  Emperor  of  Rus- 
sia, 332. 

Niell,  Lewis,  5. 

Nixon,  John,  93,  94,  314. 

Northumberland,  Duke  of, 
77- 

Norton,  William,  243. 


O’Fallon,  Major,  357. 
Offermans,  Tony,  166. 
Ogden,  Robert  C.,  147. 
Oldden,  James,  Jun.,  5. 

Opie,  John,  56,  162. 

Orleans,  Due  d’,  303. 

Otis,  Bass,  32,  33,  1 14,  1 16, 
1 17,  187. 

Ovid,  210. 

Owen,  Mr.,  283. 


In&ei 


379 


Pacain,  Wm.,  361. 

Pacheo,  Francisco,  311. 

Packard,  John  H.,  23. 

Palma,  Jacopo  (II  Vecchio), 
158. 

Palmer,  J.  W.,  318-320. 

Pannini,  Giovanni  Paolo, 

158-159- 

Parke,  Dr.  Thomas,  11 6. 

Patterson,  Daniel  F.,  188. 

Patterson,  Maj.  Robert,  337. 

Patterson,  R.,  67. 

Paxton,  Wm,  M.,  206. 

Peale,  Anna  and  Margaretta, 
70. 

Peale,  Charles  Willson,  1,  2, 
3,  6,  10,  27,  42,  64-67,  70,  78, 
313,  314,  3i6,  340,  347,  349, 
357- 

Peale,  James,  70,  316,  363. 

Peale’s  Museum,  2,  65,  66, 
313,  364. 

Peale,  Raphaelle,  3,  68. 

Peale,  Rembrandt,  3,  6,  68, 
69,  70,  103,  129,  314,  340, 
362. 

Pelham,  Peter,  353. 

Penington,  Edw.,  6. 

Penn,  Admiral,  338. 

Penn,  Granville,  338,  339. 

Penn,  John,  85,  219,  331. 

Penn,  William,  60,  331,  333, 
338. 

Pepper,  George  S.,  7,  21. 

Perrier  (master  of  Ch.  Le 
Brun),  160. 

Perry,  Marsden  J.,  83. 

Perugino,  Pietro  (Vanucci), 
135,  158. 

Peters,  Dr.  Richard,  349. 

Peters,  Richard,  70,  220. 

Peters,  Richard,  Jr.,  6,  26,  70, 
103,  129. 

Peters,  Mrs.  Richard,  Jr.,  103, 
129. 

Petrich,  18. 

Petticolas,  114. 


Phidias,  210. 

Phillips,  John  S.,  26,  212-216. 

Phillips,  Zalegman,  6. 

Physick,  Philip  Syng,  117. 

Piggott,  Goodman  and,  108. 

Pine,  R.  E.,  vi,  3,  57,  314,  315, 
322-325,  347,  348,  361. 

Pinhey,  John,  139. 

Pitt,  William,  161. 

Plumstead,  Clement,  359,  360. 

Plumstead,  Mrs.  Clement, 
359- 

Plumstead,  George,  102. 

Plumstead,  Mrs.  George,  101, 
102. 

Plumstead,  William,  102. 

Poussin,  Nicholas,  160. 

Powell,  Elizabeth,  161. 

Powers,  Hiram,  201,  202. 

Poyntell,  Wm.,  6,  9. 

Pratt,  Hannah,  61. 

Pratt,  Henry,  6,  60. 

Pratt,  Henry,  of  Lemon  Hill, 
63,  no,  in. 

Pratt  Mansion,  in. 

Pratt,  Matthew,  vi,  42,  59-61, 
63,  64,  78,  102,  in,  327-329. 

Preble,  Commodore  Edward, 
13- 

Preston,  Wm.,  77. 

Price,  Joseph  L.,  206. 

Pyne,  James  Baker,  163. 

Raeburn,  Sir  Henry,  76. 

Raffaelli,  Jean  Frangois,  305, 
306. 

Rahmeckers,  Derk,  261. 

Raibolini,  Francesco  (Fran- 
cia),  157,  158. 

Ramsay,  Allen,  314,  332,  333. 

Raphael,  Sanzio  di  Urbino, 
17,  154,  158. 

Rawle,  Wm.,  6. 

Rayneval,  Conrad  Alexandre 
Gerard  de,  see  Chevalier 
Gerard. 

Read,  George,  361. 


380 


fln&er 


Redfield,  Edward  W.,  141- 
143,  206. 

Reed,  John,  Jr.,  6. 

Reed,  Jos.,  5. 

Regnault,  Alexandre  Georges 
Henri,  183. 

Reid,  Alexander,  296. 

Reid,  Joseph,  39. 

Reinold,  Henry,  95. 
Rembrandt  van  Rijn,  150, 

301. 

Reni,  Guido,  153. 

Renniers,  Antoine,  310. 
Reynolds,  Sir  Joshua,  41,  43- 
45,  56,  75,  192,  360. 

Ribalta,  Francisco,  156. 
Ribera,  Josef,  155,  156,  309. 
Richards,  William  T.,  22, 

137. 

Rigaud-y-Ros,  H.  F.  H.  M. 

P.  A.  J.,  84. 

Ritchie,  Craig  D.,  247. 

Ritchie,  Henrietta,  247. 
Ritchie,  John  and  Craig,  248. 
Roberts,  Charles,  354. 
Robinson,  Theodore,  146,  147. 
Robusti,  Jacopo,  309,  310. 
Rodin,  Auguste,  209. 

Rogers,  Fairman,  19,  21,  188. 
Romney,  George,  76,  90,  100. 
Ronner,  Henrietta,  166. 

Rosa,  Salvator,  154,  155,  159. 
Roseberry,  Earl  of,  84,  86,  87. 
Rosengarten,  J.  G.,  147. 

Ross,  Denman,  252. 

Ross,  James,  106,  108. 

Ross,  John,  102. 

Rothermel,  Peter  F.,  186,  187. 
Rousseau,  Theodore,  166,  178, 

185. 

Roybet,  F.  V.  L.,  180. 

Rubens,  P.  P.,  152,  309. 
Ruisdael,  Jacob,  301. 

Rush,  Benjamin,  197,  316, 

318,  361. 

Rush,  John,  333. 

Rush,  Joseph,  333. 


Rush,  Richard,  6. 

Rush,  William,  v,  vi,  1,  6,  9, 
34,  193-197,  200,  314,  333- 
336. 

Saint  Memin,  Chas.  B.  J.  F. 

de,  315,  325,  326. 

Sargent,  John  Singer,  129, 
I31-. 

Sartain,  John,  19,  36. 

Savage,  Edward,  324,  361. 
Seabury,  Bishop  Samuel,  350. 
Seawell,  Wm.  Joyce,  207. 
Schalken,  Godfried,  151,  152. 
Schenck,  August  F.  A.,  179. 
Schidone,  Bartolommeo,  154. 
Schofield,  W.  Elmer,  141, 
143,  205. 

Scholl,  Jacob,  231. 

Schussele,  Christian,  21,  166. 
Schwartz,  Kurlbaum  and,  239. 
Schwartzman,  H.  J.,  220. 
Shakespeare,  William,  45,  72, 
123. 

Sharitarische,  356. 

Sharp,  William,  215,  350. 
Sharpies,  James,  313,  315, 

317-320,  364. 

Shee,  Sir  Martin  Archer,  76. 
Sheetz,  Helena  Ross,  102, 
359. 

Shelburne,  Earl  of,  84. 
Shewell,  Elizabeth,  41,  60-63. 
Shinn,  Earl,  ix. 

Shippen,  Chief  Justice  Ed- 
ward, 93,  360. 

Shippen,  Edward,  360. 
Shippen,  Peggy,  see  Mrs. 

Benedict  Arnold. 
Shoemaker,  Samuel,  6. 

Shultz,  Andrew  John,  362. 
Sieling,  J.  H.,  245. 

Simon,  Lucien,  171,  306,  307. 
Smith,  Charles,  6. 

Smith,  Horace  Wemyss,  344- 
Smith,  Joseph  Allen,  13,  15, 
I53-I55- 


fnbei 


381 


Smith,  Nathan,  194. 

Smith,  Sidney,  46. 

Smith,  William,  6,  38740,  79, 
80,  93,  98,  343,  344* 

Smith,  William  Moore,  79. 
Smybert,  John,  57,  340,  341. 
Snyders,  Frans,  152. 

Solon,  M.  L.,  286,  287. 
Spaight,  Richard  Dobbs,  315, 
325,  326. 

Spinola,  Marquis  Ambrogio 
di,  289. 

Spofford,  Ernest,  viii. 
Stanfield,  Wm.  Clarkson,  163. 
Staniforth,  Rev.  T.,  288. 
Starr,  Dr.  Isaac,  206. 

St.  Clair,  Sir  John,  363. 
Steen,  Jan,  301. 

Steuben,  Frederic  William 
Augustus,  316. 

Stevens,  Alfred,  181,  182,  186, 
305,  306. 

Stevenson,  Mrs.  Cornelius, 
259,  275. 

Stewardson,  Edmund  A.,  203. 
Stewart,  A.  T.,  202. 

Stewart,  Gilbert,  72. 

Stiegel,  Wm.  Henry,  244, 
245- 

Stimmer,  Tobias,  278. 
Stotesbury,  Edward  T.,  169. 
Struys,  Alexander,  167. 
Stuart,  Gabriel  (Gilbert),  88. 
Stuart,  Gilbert,  viii,  27,  42, 
43,  57,  71-90,  105,  106,  1 15, 
118-121,  129,  186,  238,  314, 
315,  320,  3L47,  348,  353-355, 
363. 

Life  of,  71-81. 

Portraits  of  Men,  93-98. 
Portraits  of  Women,  98- 
104. 

Portraits  of  Washington,  Si- 
89;  Athenaeum  type,  89- 
347,  357 ; Lansdowne 

type,  84-89;  Vaughan 
type,  82,  238. 


Sully,  Lawrence,  105. 

Sully,  Thomas,  17,  27,  105- 
109,  1 12,  1 1 5,  120,  127,  186, 
187,  314,  315,  320-322,  362. 
Sweetbriar,  220. 

Swift,  Charles,  6. 

Sylvestre,  303. 

Taft,  Lorado,  196. 

Tait,  Caroline  Gibson,  187. 
Talleyrand,  55. 

Tanner,  Henry  Ossawa,  140. 
Tarbell,  Edmund  C.,  141. 
Tatem,  James,  6. 

Temple,  Joseph  E;,  25,  28, 
130,  1 66,  167,  221. 

Teniers,  David,  301. 
Thackeray,  Wm.  M.,  45. 
Theotocopuli,  Domenico  (El 
Greco),  311. 

Thompson,  Miss  Cornelia, 
263. 

Thompson,  Samuel  Gustine, 
295. 

Thomson,  Charles,  314. 
Thoreau,  Henry,  178. 
Thorwaldsen,  199,  200. 
Tiepolo,  Giovanni  Battista, 
311- 

Tilghman,  William,  6. 
Tilmore,  Joseph,  116. 
Tintoretto,  II,  see  Jacopo  Ro- 
busti. 

Tissot,  James  Jacques,  186. 
Titian  (Vecelli,  Tiziano),  58. 
Tod,  William  H.,  6. 

Toft,  Thomas,  261,  262. 

Tosti,  Cardinal  Antonio,  216. 
Tosti  Collection,  216. 

Trask,  John  E.  D.,  viii. 
Trouillebert,  Paul  Desire,  166. 
Trumbull,  John,  42,  69,  78, 
193,  363,  364- 

Troyon,  Constant,  179,  180. 
Ts’ang  Yinghsuang,  265. 
Tucker  and  Hemphill,  222, 
226,  236,  238. 


382 


IFn&ei 


Tucker  and  Hulme,  235,  236, 
237. 

Tucker,  Benjamin,  234. 
Tucker,  Thomas,  236. 
Tucker,  William  Ellis,  233, 
234,  235. 

Tuckerman,  Henry  T.,  202. 
Turner,  J.  M.  W.,  43. 
Twachtman,  John  H.,  141. 
Tyler,  Lyon  G.,  242. 

Van  Asch,  Pieter  Janszoon, 
151- 

Van  Balen,  Hendrik,  152. 
Van  der  Faes,  see  Sir  Peter 
Lely. 

Van  der  Heist,  Bartholo- 
meus,  149,  150,  309. 

Van  der  Meulen,  Antoine 
Francois,  151. 

Van  der  Neer,  Aert,  300. 
Van  der  Poel,  Egbert,  151. 
Van  der  Vliet,  Jan  Joris,  151. 
Van  Dyck,  Anton,  56,  73,  153, 

309. 

Van  Goyen,  Jan,  151,  300. 
Van  Lint,  Pieter,  151. 

Van  Marcke,  Emile,  179. 
Van  Ostade,  Adrien,  151. 
Van  Poelenburgh,  Cornelis, 
151- 

Van  Schendel,  Petrus,  166. 
Van  Tol,  Dominicus,  151. 
Vanuxen,  James,  194. 
Vanuxen,  Miss,  34,  194. 
Vasari,  Giorgio,  158. 
Vaughan,  John,  338,  362. 
Vaughan  Portrait  of  Wash- 
ington, 82,  238. 

Vaughan,  Samuel,  83. 

Vaux,  Richard,  128,  129. 
Vaux,  William  S.,  272. 
Velasquez,  Diego  Rodriguez 
da  Silva  y,  301,  31 1. 
Vergennes,  Count  de,  315. 
Ver  Meer  of  Delft,  Johannes, 

150. 


Vernet,  Claude  Joseph,  17, 
160,  161. 

Veronese,  Bonifazio,  158. 

Veronese,  Paolo,  see  Paolo 
Caliari. 

Verplanck,  G.  C.,  198. 

Victoria,  Queen,  109,  21 1. 

Wager,  Peter,  6. 

Wager,  Philip,  6. 

Wallace,  John  B.,  5. 

Wain,  Jacob  S.,  6. 

Walpole,  Horace,  73. 

Wan-li,  270,  271. 

Wanton,  Lady,  359. 

Ward,  William,  76. 

Warden,  W.  S.,  127. 

Warren,  William,  125. 

Warren,  E.  Burgess,  169. 

Washington,  Bushrod,  9. 

Washington,  George,  v,  vi,  2, 
65,  68-70,  78-85,  87,  88,  95, 
100,  104,  123,  186,  190,  192, 
194,  200,  231,  238,  314,  315, 
317,  318,  322,  323,  326,  335, 
347,.  357,  358,  363. 

Washington,  Portraits  of: 
Athenaeum,  82,  89 ; Lans- 
downe,  17,  81,  84,  86-88; 
Vaughan,  82,  83. 

Washington,  Martha,  80,  316, 
363. 

Watson,  John,  340,  341. 

Watts,  D.,  6. 

Waugh,  Sam’l.  B.,  127. 

Wayne,  Anthony,  316,  318, 
357,  358. 

Webster,  Noah,  318. 

Weir,  J.  Alden,  147. 

Wells,  John,  197. 

Welsh,  John,  328. 

Welsh,  Herbert,  321. 

Wertmuller,  Adolph  Ulric, 
15,  339- 

Wesley,  John,  no. 

West,  Benjamin,  7-9,  13,  17, 
18,  36-56,  59-64,  68,  73-75, 


IFnfcex 


383 


77,  79,  106,  1 15,  122,  126, 
314,  321,  327,  329,  331,  332, 
342-347,  350,  352,  354,  363, 

364. 

West,  John,  63. 

West,  Thomas,  331. 

Wharton,  Francis  Rawle,  89, 
347,  357- 

Wharton,  Joseph,  42,  43. 
Whelen,  Henry,  7. 

Whipple,  Henry  C.,  213,  216. 
Whistler,  James  A.  McNeill, 
295-297. 

White,  Bishop  William,  62, 
93,  262. 

Whitman,  Walt,  178. 
Wilcocks,  Benj.  Chew,  105. 
Widener,  Geo.  D.,  169. 
Wiedman,  Thomas,  5. 

Wilkes,  John,  vi,  324. 

Wilkie,  Sir  David,  43. 
Wilkinson,  T.  B.,  329,  356. 
William  III,  152,  332. 
Williams,  Jonathan,  106. 
Williams,  Samuel,  86,  87. 
Williams,  Timothy,  87. 
Williams,  William,  38. 
Williamson,  G.  C.,  360. 
Willing,  Abigail,  see  Mrs. 
Richard  Peters,  Jr. 


Willing,  Anne,  see  Mrs. 

William  Bingham. 

Willing,  Elizabeth,  see  Mrs. 

William  Jackson. 

Willing,  Thomas,  85,  103. 
Wilson,  Richard,  162. 
Wilstach,  W.  P.,  294. 
Wilstach,  Mrs.  W.  P.,  294, 

303. 

Winder,  Levin  Yeardley,  318. 
Winner,  Wm.  E.,  70,  364. 
Winter,  John,  342. 

Wistar,  Mrs.  Esther  F.,  352. 
Wistar,  Dr.  Mifflin,  352. 
Wister,  Mrs.  Owen,  280. 
Wister,  William  Rotch,  79. 
Woollett,  William,  215. 
Wordsworth,  William,  no. 
Wouverman,  Philip,  151. 
Wright,  Joseph,  42,  122,  123. 
Wright,  Patience  Lovell,  122. 
Wycoff,  Mr.,  14. 

Yeardley,  Sir  George,  319. 
Yorke,  Mrs.  Edward,  260. 
Young,  Charles  Morris,  143. 
Yung-cheng,  264,  267. 

Zantzinger,  Thos.  Ballou,  6. 
Ziem,  Felix,  166. 

Zucchi,  Antonio,  161. 


GETTY  CENTER  LIBRARY 


3 3125  00649  2819 


